|
Isentropy posted:I forget which country but when someone developed nukes they would meet with Americans and get told "no, try this. No try this". Basically help them get at the right answer without giving it. Maybe that's what happened I assume the Israelis just fax the whole design document over.
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2024 20:05
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 18:08 |
|
|
Flournival Dixon posted:I don't know why you'd make a missile without explosives unless you're doing like a single person target thing, pretty much anything that can fly can carry a payload. The fuel in the missile can be enough. ie, HMS Sheffield.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2024 20:34
|
|
|
There's only a few kinetic energy weapons that I know of that are in more or less common use. There's obviously bullets, sabot anti-tank rounds, and then there are a few anti-satellite weapons that rely solely on kinetic energy. Plus the knife missile. There were also the lazy dog darts from Vietnam, basically bullets with fins that you drop out the back of an airplane. All weapons are kinetic weapons if you think about it. Except chemical and biological weapons as well as lasers. FirstnameLastname posted:at the speeds they go, explosives are less effective by weight than just prioritizing density for a kinetic impact - they're already going faster than almost any chemical explosion velocity I'm not sure this is true for normal hypersonic missiles. The Russian Kinzhal only goes about Mach 10 which is slower than RDX explodes. You also don't care that much about those relative velocities but rather more about the total energy you can deliver to the target. I think you need to get up to orbital speeds (Mach 20+???) to start caring about if you can deliver more energy with chemicals or pure density. BearsBearsBears has issued a correction as of 21:20 on Mar 18, 2024 |
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2024 21:17
|
|
|
do big mach'n kinetic weapons have the same pressure wave for wide area casualties like explosives?
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2024 21:25
|
|
|
Real hurthling! posted:do big mach'n kinetic weapons have the same pressure wave for wide area casualties like explosives? Not at Mach 10 but yes at high enough speeds that you usually don't use Mach numbers. Think of asteroid impact craters. The dinosaurs were wiped out by a kinetic impact. Edit: Asteroids and meteors are moving even faster than orbital speed. BearsBearsBears has issued a correction as of 21:36 on Mar 18, 2024 |
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2024 21:31
|
|
|
right but i mean the sort that a boat would fire
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2024 21:36
|
|
|
Real hurthling! posted:right but i mean the sort that a boat would fire Technically yes but it's much smaller than you would get from explosives at those speeds. You do get spalling which can also kill.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2024 21:49
|
|
|
BearsBearsBears posted:Not at Mach 10 but yes at high enough speeds that you usually don't use Mach numbers. Think of asteroid impact craters. The dinosaurs were wiped out by a kinetic impact. Rods from God in sci fi. Or project thor. It usually boils down to yes you can but (list of practicality issues) Easier to just drop a looney tunes amount of TNT.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2024 22:29
|
|
|
Nobody really knows what will happen when a modern weapon impacts a modern warship. Design since the 60's has been largely speculative based on what might happen when an unarmored, but tightly compartmentalized, ship is hit by few missiles rather than many shells. The Falklands was pretty shocking, but when British damage control worked and was able to put those compartments to use, not as bad as the worst fears of the missile age.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2024 22:39
|
|
|
DJJIB-DJDCT posted:Nobody really knows what will happen when a modern weapon impacts a modern warship. Design since the 60's has been largely speculative based on what might happen when an unarmored, but tightly compartmentalized, ship is hit by few missiles rather than many shells. The Falklands was pretty shocking, but when British damage control worked and was able to put those compartments to use, not as bad as the worst fears of the missile age. Occasionally we get to see a decommissioned warship get torpedoed in an exercise. The last thing through your mind would be the deck beneath your boots.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2024 23:01
|
|
|
DJJIB-DJDCT posted:The Falklands was pretty shocking, but when British damage control worked and was able to put those compartments to use, not as bad as the worst fears of the missile age. *offer not valid on modern ASBMs with warheads five times the size of an exocet
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2024 23:15
|
|
|
DancingShade posted:Occasionally we get to see a decommissioned warship get torpedoed in an exercise. The last thing through your mind would be the deck beneath your boots. Well yeah, but presumably there's a difference between a torpedo going off under the hull and a missile impacting above the waterline.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2024 23:25
|
|
|
https://x.com/Militarydotcom/status/1769852235675025663?s=20 https://x.com/Militarydotcom/status/1769820319831720090?s=20
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2024 23:27
|
|
|
sullat posted:Well yeah, but presumably there's a difference between a torpedo going off under the hull and a missile impacting above the waterline. I dunno if you've seen the pictures of ASBM damage from Houthi attacks against container ships, but they come down at a very high angle and at least one pic has an exit blast emerging like a hundred feet lower on the ship than the entry hole. Against a warship, that could look like a massive blast punching out the side of the hull beneath the waterline and sinking it in minutes.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2024 23:30
|
|
|
The Oldest Man posted:I dunno if you've seen the pictures of ASBM damage from Houthi attacks against container ships, but they come down at a very high angle and at least one pic has an exit blast emerging like a hundred feet lower on the ship than the entry hole. Against a warship, that could look like a massive blast punching out the side of the hull beneath the waterline and sinking it in minutes. It probably wouldn’t sink, warships are extremely compartmented and can stay afloat with catastrophic damage, the real problem is it capsizing or listing so much you cant rescue or repair.
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2024 00:41
|
|
|
Cruising into battle with my thin skinned aluminium tub but strutting like it's WW2 battleship steel.
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2024 00:41
|
|
|
Well, without digging out DK Brown's books on the subject - but I recommend you do, he was the chief naval architect of the postwar RN - he evaluated every instance of battle damage on every class of warship in the world wars and after. Fire, for the most part, is not as much of a threat as it once was. There were some 60's and 70's American warships that had aluminum and fibreglass superstructures that in theory would have burned down to the waterline, but as with all of these things, the primary defence is not being detected, and secondarily not getting hit. Firefighting on ships has gotten much better, and there is both less to set on fire these days, and more energetic explosives that more fully combust, instead of spreading some amount of unexploded fill that starts fires. Flooding, that's what all of the work in compartmentalization is for. The amount of water it takes to sink a warship is still significant, considering the size of damage control parties and the ability to pump out large volumes of water, as well as sailing in a group so warships can quickly be taken under tow. As far as armour, and keeping damage out, this is a debate that's been going on since the 60's but it seems reasonable that the cost of armouring ships against anything that could conceivably threaten them is far too high with missiles, since the probability for a hit is higher than gunfire, and also because of how missiles work, the warheads are larger. The compartments around vital areas act as protection, and naval architecture has gotten better in that regard. I'm agnostic on the issue, but I think well designed warships can suffer more damage than people expect, but conversely under crewed or poorly maintained vessels will have a hard time coping with damage they should have survived in theory.
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2024 00:58
|
|
|
Sound like we could find out relatively soon
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2024 01:03
|
|
|
DJJIB-DJDCT posted:I'm agnostic on the issue, but I think well designed warships can suffer more damage than people expect, but conversely under crewed or poorly maintained vessels will have a hard time coping with damage they should have survived in theory. I buy that a warship could survive an attack like this since the USS Cole bomb was about 450kg and right at the waterline, but an ASBM with a warhead 1.5-2x as big is kind of like, the new normal for peer anti-ship weapons, and I wouldn't bet on a favorable outcome since it took multiple days for the Cole damage control teams to get the flooding fully under control and the ship had to be taken home on a heavy lift ship out of the water to get repaired.
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2024 01:16
|
|
|
Putting a naval ship permanently out of commission but not most of the crew would be the best outcome. Also put more competition on the dry docks.
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2024 01:21
|
|
|
The Oldest Man posted:*offer not valid on modern ASBMs with warheads five times the size of an exocet Don't forget about the enlaitment crisis cutting the available men for damage control
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2024 01:33
|
|
|
Was the ansarsllah hypersonic missile story bs or what
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2024 01:34
|
|
|
my guess is that the usn eventually sinks itself, either through friendly fire or when some system fails from the stress of the deployment
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2024 01:36
|
|
|
Our equipment wasn't designed for this kind of stress
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2024 01:38
|
|
|
Mandel Brotset posted:my guess is that the usn eventually sinks itself, either through friendly fire or when some system fails from the stress of the deployment bring back dynastic failson pilots and everything will work itself out
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2024 01:38
|
|
|
Honky Mao posted:Was the ansarsllah hypersonic missile story bs or what dunno but they seem to not really be doing much fabricating of capabilities or intent and given how successful they've been im not sure what it would benefit them to start claiming capabilities they dont have now
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2024 01:50
|
|
|
doesn’t China have a few exported hypersonic missiles like the CM-302? Pakistan has some of those and could be a conceivable way for Ansar Allah to get them.
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2024 02:01
|
|
|
DJJIB-DJDCT posted:
Ever wondered why US navy ships seem so accident prone? Let me tell you about “optimal manning!”
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2024 02:17
|
|
|
Saw a video of f15 fighter pilots scrambling to respond to a Russian fighter in whatever area they were in. It showed them running out of the building they were in, getting into a van, and being sped over to the hangars their planes were in. Overall it was a pretty quick process but I got a really good laugh at the top comment pointing out that the mission timeline lies in the hands of a 2018 Ford Transit.
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2024 02:17
|
|
|
from Niger: https://twitter.com/BTnewsroom/status/1769758042571038855
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2024 02:40
|
|
|
D-Pad posted:Saw a video of f15 fighter pilots scrambling to respond to a Russian fighter in whatever area they were in. It showed them running out of the building they were in, getting into a van, and being sped over to the hangars their planes were in. Overall it was a pretty quick process but I got a really good laugh at the top comment pointing out that the mission timeline lies in the hands of a 2018 Ford Transit. Should have been playing cards on a fold up picnic table in the hanger with ground crew between the jets.
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2024 02:45
|
|
|
Honky Mao posted:Was the ansarsllah hypersonic missile story bs or what Hypersonic AnsarAllah is strong and real and is my friend
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2024 02:58
|
|
|
The largest kinetic weapon we've ever planned and never attempted is rods from god, which are telephone poll sized tungsten rods shot out of a satellite from space into earth. Tungsten will not break on impact and will cause a massive explosion from all the energy being transferred from an incredibly hard object into a not so much one from having to stop abruptly into it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kinetic_bombardment Tungsten make armor piercing ammo, it's also capable like ceramic, of shattering bullet proof glass as its atomic structure its extremely hard/sharp. HouseofSuren has issued a correction as of 06:26 on Mar 19, 2024 |
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2024 06:23
|
|
|
that's an absolutely beautiful weapon's system. it requires a ton of energy to get into the atmosphere then the projectile looses most of its efficacy returning from the atmosphere
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2024 06:29
|
|
|
What's really interesting is the competing idea's between the ICBM and the FOBS https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fractional_Orbital_Bombardment_System
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2024 06:36
|
|
|
Orange Devil posted:Another crazy banger from Yemen directly challenging US cultural hegemony. it's every communist poster's sacred duty to spread this absolute banger, while also playing at maximum volume, preferably over a PA system
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2024 06:47
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2024 07:32
|
|
|
You know I was looking up something out of ignorant curiosity. https://www.africom.mil/about-the-command#:~:text=U.S.%20Africa%20Command%20is%20located,in%20Stuttgart%2DM%C3%B6hringen%2C%20Germany. "U.S. Africa Command, headquartered in Stuttgart, Germany" 
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2024 10:54
|
|
|
I'm starting Moon Command, headquarted in my bedroom. Specifically under the bed where it's really dark and my glow in the dark command stuff works all day long.
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2024 10:55
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 18:08 |
|
|
Hey have a kick rear end agitprop music video. It's DPRK parade footage with Pertubator soundtrack. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2NjkcjueR4k Nothing offensive unless you're looking at the marching and wincing at the lower leg impact.
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2024 11:23
|
|