|
as other people have pointed out, land based silos are seriously hard targets and you need to land a very close subterranean detonation to wreck one. You also need very precise impact times to defeat dense pack.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2018 19:24
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 9, 2024 04:16 |
|
|
DesperateDan posted:Duxford or Hendon? Duxford is definitely a whole day affair, Hendon isn't quite so large and I don't think you pay to get in. I'm getting dragged to the harry potter thing later this year and it's not a full day but is apparently great if you love the series. I hate it, but I used it to secure a day at duxford later this year I guess it's Hendon, whichever is closer to London. Yeah, I have to trade a morning at Harry Potter with my aunt for an afternoon at the RAF museam. So I guess we'll try to plan being on one of the first tours then making out way back a bit south for the afternoon.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2018 19:48
|
|
|
If the reentry vehicle suffers a birdstrike or whatever and groundbursts 50m instead of 10m away from the silo will the silo seriously just keep on truckin? That's pretty impressive.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2018 20:20
|
|
|
evil_bunnY posted:Very important for counter-force (sniping silos and C&C). Doesn't this assume the target country is not launching everything they have once they see an incoming strike? Striking empty silos seems like a waste of a good nuke.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2018 20:28
|
|
|
Smiling Jack posted:as other people have pointed out, land based silos are seriously hard targets and you need to land a very close subterranean detonation to wreck one. You also need very precise impact times to defeat dense pack. Is Dense Packing a thing that the Russians actually have done somewhere? We haven't.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2018 20:29
|
|
|
Doctor Grape Ape posted:Doesn't this assume the target country is not launching everything they have once they see an incoming strike? Striking empty silos seems like a waste of a good nuke. It all depends on how fast the birds get in the air. The distance that they are detected at is a big part of that. This is also a big part of what makes SSBNs with precision nukes so scary and why those CEP rules exist. Subs can get close enough to launch with essentially no warning, and accurate enough warheads would re-open the possibility of a first strike that eliminates most of the enemy's arsenal.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2018 20:30
|
|
aphid_licker posted:If the reentry vehicle suffers a birdstrike or whatever and groundbursts 50m instead of 10m away from the silo will the silo seriously just keep on truckin? That's pretty impressive. Obvious and unhelpful answer: depends on the warhead and the silo. The smaller the CEP the smaller the warhead and the fewer the warheads you need for a confirmed kill.
|
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2018 20:34
|
|
|
Also the state or readiness that your missiles are at, how fast your "this is total nuclear war" decision making process is, and other factors come into play as well. The ballpark flight time for an ICBM going from Russia to the US is ~30 minutes. So in that time you have to detect the launch or incoming warheads, people have to make the decision that this is a no bullshit nuclear attack and not radar gently caress ups or a Swedish weather satellite launch or something, make the decision to go full nuclear war mode, issue launch commands, and then launch the warheads. A lot of poo poo has to go down in a very narrow time frame, so it's not all that unexpected that some missiles are going to still be in their silos when the bombs hit. Digging them in deep just further limits the possibility that someone is going to look at all that and figure that they could first strike enough warheads to make their own casualties acceptable. This is also a big part of why the transition from liquid fueled to anything else was such a big deal, because you didn't have the lengthy fueling process for the missiles.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2018 20:34
|
|
|
Both powers tried to play a lot with the reaction times, so as to get a strategic advantage. The soviets tried to push M/IRBMs to Cuba in the 60's, so as to cut the US response time to one third (and make them remove their own missiles from Turkey/Italy). Then they started thinking about fractional orbital bombardment (nuclear warheads sent to orbit, ready for use), and it's a good thing that SALT II happened. In the 80's, NATO deployed Pershings and GLCMs to catch the Soviet silos before launch. The Soviets decided to move a lot of ICBMs to train and TEL based mobile platforms, so as to retain a good second strike cap (SS-24/25). As Soviet SLBMs became more accurate, US tried to first make a rail based ICBM (first concept for the MX missile that became the Peacekeeper), and then started developing a road mobile ICBM (Midgetman). It's a good thing that the cold war eventually ended by the 90's, because the whole thing was becoming crazier and crazier. Reading things like Operation RYaN and Able Archer 83 for example makes you think that things did not go extremely south due to pure luck in the end. Dante80 fucked around with this message at 21:18 on Apr 2, 2018 |
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2018 21:16
|
|
|
Also, go to the Natural History Museum. A lot of people are turned off by it being full of kids, but you will see things that astound. I got to see Cleopatra in her sarcophagus, which always stands out.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2018 21:17
|
|
|
Dante80 posted:It's a good thing that the cold war eventually ended by the 90's, because the whole thing was becoming crazier and crazier. Reading things like Operation RYaN and Able Archer 83 for example makes you think that things did not go extremely south due to pure luck in the end. Everyone here's watched Deutschland '83, right? If not: Watch Deutschland '83.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2018 21:22
|
|
|
FYI Deutschland 86 will be released later this year.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2018 21:23
|
|
|
Oh cool, there's a SpaceX launch from the Cape in a few minutes. Gonna have to look out the window and watch it  e: actually it'll probably be too cloudy for me to see it from Orlando 
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2018 21:27
|
|
|
Craptacular posted:FYI Deutschland 86 will be released later this year. That’s the second-best news I’ve heard all day.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2018 22:11
|
|
|
Phanatic posted:Is Dense Packing a thing that the Russians actually have done somewhere? We haven't.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2018 22:18
|
|
|
JcDent posted:How important is that 10 m CEP when you're slinging nukes? I doubt a nuclear war would be counterforce only with achievement points given out for being able to nail a launch shaft as it opens. It's more about being able to put a 300kt+ nuclear warhead directly on top of/underground near a closed silo door, the idea being that the massive heat and pressure from the detonation will destroy or incapacitate the silo, regardless of whether it was open or closed. Notably, the Russian missiles do not have a (demonstrated/revealed) ground burst capability. The public data says they can only do airburst, which makes it much easier for a silo to survive. orange juche fucked around with this message at 22:28 on Apr 2, 2018 |
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2018 22:24
|
|
|
Dante80 posted:Both powers tried to play a lot with the reaction times, so as to get a strategic advantage. The soviets tried to push M/IRBMs to Cuba in the 60's, so as to cut the US response time to one third (and make them remove their own missiles from Turkey/Italy). Then they started thinking about fractional orbital bombardment (nuclear warheads sent to orbit, ready for use), and it's a good thing that SALT II happened. After reading Command and Control I'm convinced that an accidental nuke detonation never happened just because we got lucky
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2018 23:25
|
|
|
A question just occurred to me in the wake of the Satan launch. What determined whether a given class of weapon got NATO reporting names or not? Aircraft and missiles get them, but tanks didn't. Submarines get them, but not surface ships, so what the Soviets called the Whale-class we called Novembers, but then stuff like the Sovremennyys are just named after the first ship in the class. And then with the Akula we break from the standard submarine reporting scheme and use a Russian word, but a different Russian word than the Russians call them.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2018 23:32
|
|
|
aphid_licker posted:If the reentry vehicle suffers a birdstrike or whatever and groundbursts 50m instead of 10m away from the silo will the silo seriously just keep on truckin? That's pretty impressive. Yeah. Shame about the other half dozen warheads right behind it if the Russian spread was anything like the SAC plans. It's only embarrassingly recently that anybody sat down and compared the various services' targets in the event of all out nuclear war and realized that there was so many nukes that even the most bumfuck Siberian railway crossing was going to eat multiple cans of sunshine. Seriously, read command and control. Unless you like being able to sleep at night. Nebakenezzer posted:After reading Command and Control I'm convinced that an accidental nuke detonation never happened just because we got lucky Agreed.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2018 00:59
|
|
|
Phanatic posted:Submarines get them, but not surface ships, so what the Soviets called the Whale-class we called Novembers, but then stuff like the Sovremennyys are just named after the first ship in the class. Soviet surface ships definitely had NATO designations: Kara, and Kresta class cruisers -  BerkutUdaloy - FregatSovremenny - SarychSlava - AtlantKirov - OrlanKrivak - Burevestnikand so on. Phanatic posted:And then with the Akula we break from the standard submarine reporting scheme and use a Russian word, but a different Russian word than the Russians call them. Not the first time either where NATO code name was already in soviet use for a different ship class. ASW variant of Osa-class missile boar (NATO Stenka) was known as Tarantul-class patrol boats in soviet service, while NATO gave code name Tarantul to Osa-class successor.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2018 01:06
|
|
|
Just me or does space scifi not use reporting names for enemy stuff; the closest has been Halo I think.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2018 01:11
|
|
|
Raenir Salazar posted:Just me or does space scifi not use reporting names for enemy stuff; the closest has been Halo I think.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2018 01:14
|
|
|
JcDent posted:Well, poo poo, I'll have to update my design... Something something "the second coming of Satan." "The Russian RS-28: Why Wait for Jesus' Second Coming, When Satan Has Already Come Twice?" BIG HEADLINE fucked around with this message at 01:37 on Apr 3, 2018 |
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2018 01:28
|
|
|
Gervasius posted:Soviet surface ships definitely had NATO designations: Right, but there was nothing systematic about it. Sovremmenny, Kirov, Udaloy, and Slava all took the name of the lead ship in the respective classes. Kara, Kresta, Krivak are all K-names, but the Kara and Krestas are guided-missile cruisers, while the Krivak's an ASW frigate, and other surface combatants didn't get K names. Contrast that with the submarines getting NATO phonetic alphabet names, or how air-to-air missiles get names that start with A, surface-to-surface get names that start with S, fighters get names that start with F, helos get names that start with H. For surface ships it just seems random. Is it just an artifact of how much more concerned we were with the rest of their hardware than we were with their surface fleet?
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2018 01:55
|
|
|
Might have been that the Soviets publicized more information about them?
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2018 01:58
|
|
|
Nebakenezzer posted:After reading Command and Control I'm convinced that an accidental nuke detonation never happened just because we got lucky The fact that most of the incidents where WWIII could have (and should have) happened were stopped by an unusually level-headed person in the chain of command is the best argument I can think of, of there in fact being a god that wants us to survive. . . long enough for the inevitable ecological holocaust to do its thing.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2018 04:57
|
|
|
Proposal: Everyone with keys has to watch Threads.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2018 05:05
|
|
|
Phanatic posted:surface-to-surface get names that start with S Ah yes I remember hunting for Russian Sfrog missile TELs during my training
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2018 05:17
|
|
|
Gervasius posted:Osa-class missile boar 
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2018 05:58
|
|
|
SimonCat posted:I remember being confused when a Jewish girl I went to high school got mad that someone said "gypped."
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2018 06:17
|
|
|
It's about gypsies.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2018 07:06
|
|
|
Proper Kerni ng posted:They only carry one Kornet apiece, but are immune to most small arms fire and surprisingly resistant to anti-materiel rifles. That looks like it needs an Ork on its back.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2018 07:59
|
|
|
Fearless posted:That looks like it needs an Ork on its back.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2018 08:05
|
|
|
Proper Kerni ng posted:I may or may not have spent an inordinate amount of time unsuccessfully trying to GIS a 40K Orc war boar with a missile launcher. Snakebites can't be bothered with anything that complex
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2018 08:09
|
|
|
goatsestretchgoals posted:Proposal: Everyone with keys has to watch Threads. That would do it.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2018 09:06
|
|
|
Russia has issued Notams in the Baltic sea for the coming week, in other peoples FIR which is highly unusual if i understand it correctly. Everyone is very curious about what and if they will shoot something. Lot of flights need to be rerouted and shipping will be affected as well. https://twitter.com/forsvarsakerhet/status/979826945184714752 Fun times.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2018 09:47
|
|
|
thesurlyspringKAA posted:Ah yes I remember hunting for Russian Sfrog missile TELs during my training That was ye olde artillery designation for Mars and Luna unguided rockets, meaning Free Rocket Over Ground. Later tactical missiles like Tochka, Oka etc were designated as SS- (land based surface to surface missiles), since they were guided. 
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2018 14:29
|
|
|
Phanatic posted:Right, but there was nothing systematic about it. Sovremmenny, Kirov, Udaloy, and Slava all took the name of the lead ship in the respective classes. Kara, Kresta, Krivak are all K-names, but the Kara and Krestas are guided-missile cruisers, while the Krivak's an ASW frigate, and other surface combatants didn't get K names. Contrast that with the submarines getting NATO phonetic alphabet names, or how air-to-air missiles get names that start with A, surface-to-surface get names that start with S, fighters get names that start with F, helos get names that start with H. For surface ships it just seems random. Some of the confusion can be explained that the reporting names are put in place sometimes way ahead of any actual confirmation of the thing and that early on it's probably pretty vague what is being talked about where.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2018 14:33
|
|
|
BIG HEADLINE posted:Something something "the second coming of Satan." I think RS-28 — Satan already came twice has a better ring to it
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2018 15:05
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 9, 2024 04:16 |
|
|
JcDent posted:Well, poo poo, I'll have to update my design... HAIL, RS-28 SATAN 2: LEVEL, RAZE, REPEAT.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2018 17:26
|
|
