|
Pretty sure the difference here is that these small tactical nukes wouldn't be a first-strike option so that during peacetime they would be locked up in a munitions depot magazine with all of the "two man" safeties in the world. A pilot wouldn't have these bolted to his hard mounts during normal peace time operations. Said pilot would only have the option to use the nukes if the balloon went up & (potentially) the President had launched a nuclear strike and in doing so released control of his nuclear forces to his theater commanders to utilize as needed. So the pilot has physical control over the actual release of the bomb onto its physical target but the president & his advisors are the ones who released them upon the world and to the commander/individual pilots and once the president says "Bomb the gently caress out of everyone" there isn't any need for a two-man rule, shits already going down. Ridgewell posted:I was not very clear what I meant in my previous post, sorry. I am not disputing that the two-man rule was ever abandoned (I simply don't know if/when it was). I felt there is a discrepancy betweens iyaayas01's most recent post and his OP. In the OP, he describes the F-106 as the only instance where the two-man rule was abandoned, but in his most recent post, he describes other single-seat fighters (earlier than the F-106) as carrying nuclear weapons. This means that one person, the pilot, had ultimate launch authority. My understanding of the two-man rule is that at any stage of ordering the use of nuclear weapons, two people have to be involved (giving the orders (POTUS and SecDef together *), passing them on, and turning the keys/pushing the buttons). This is nicely demonstrated in the opening sequence of WarGames.
|
#
¿
Dec 29, 2010 12:08
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 2, 2024 09:25 |
|
|
Craptacular posted:Also the building was most likely full of intel that would be impossible to recover if it was blown up. Also it becomes problematic to get a DNA sample and positive confirmation that he was there. We would have still needed to send a team on the ground to recover some sort of Osama-bits for proof to the rest of the world.
|
|
#
¿
May 7, 2011 18:14
|
|
|
Are India'snukes to be considered compact? A lot of our early designs were quite cumbersome. It takes a lot of money, and r&d time to miniaturize a nuke. And even if weight isn't an issue, there are size constraints for internal stores, and ground clearance is a factor in external storage. And if your goal is to nuke your neighbor, low observability is hugely important. That said I know little about Indian nuclear capability. Anyone in the know care to comment/speculate? Or Pakistan's, for that matter
|
|
#
¿
Jul 5, 2011 22:28
|
|
|
My house is about 3/4th of a mile beyond the flight line of the 106th air rescue wing NY ANG base, which is a pararescue facility today but was once a fighter interceptor air wing. At least 2 squadrons (4 I think) of special operations capable personnel, and one of the eastern most heavy-lift capable runways that can land B52's or C5's in the us means I'm pretty well hosed in a nuke Exchange. I'm glad the cold war has ended. But if there were an invasion, or resource war our air wings runway, plus long islands barrier beaches and natural harbors I always figured the Russians would want to take the area intact, as a foothold into the eastern us theater of war.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 26, 2011 19:51
|
|
|
Used to be a missile complex about 5 miles up the road. The sheriffs use the silos for blowing up confiscated fireworks today. I figure jfk and lga were both smoking holes, either the Russians were already targeting them, or our own forces would crater the runways and blow the fuel depots while withdrawing in a conventional fight. The same goes for the big suspension bridges out of LI, and NYC's tunnels. New York city would be a huge mess with numerous economic targets. There are some fighter wings and ground forces but not much armor around in the decisive first few hours. With such a lack of forces I could see a couple ekranoplans slipping across the Atlantic, coming into the protected peconic bay and rolling tanks down sunrise highway. About 7 miles from beachhead to the 106ths flight line. Then they pull plays from the old Afghanistan invasion and ride troops in while transmitting as airliners.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 26, 2011 20:50
|
|
|
Ever since I got night vision I've been looking for a friend to explore the bunker complexes interior with, most of mine are too chicken though. I've been around the exterior of the sites once or twice.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 27, 2011 15:15
|
|
|
Scratch Monkey posted:They were two things: The other night I saw some WW2 in color footage that was quite haunting; an entire airbase stands at attention as a heavy bomber comes in for a belly landing, the ball turret gunner stuck at his post. I couldn't imagine the horror of being a draftee assigned to that particular assignment.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 21, 2011 20:29
|
|
|
Pretty sure airframes like this might be more at home in the "drug war" thread, there were some aircraft solicitations made in the past few years for commercially available reconnassaince and gunship platforms, specifically wanting lower cost prop driven aircraft. (e: for use in drug interdiction in south/central America) ming-the-mazdaless posted:Not exactly cold war but I thought some folks may get a kick out of this: LavistaSays fucked around with this message at 18:57 on Nov 23, 2011 |
|
#
¿
Nov 23, 2011 18:54
|
|
|
mlmp08 posted:F-15s and drones it is! The newish super eagles with internal stores, with radar masking techniques taken from the f22/f35 is probably a great option. The f15 is a great, proven design and the pilots who fly them always have great things to say about the airframe.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 13, 2011 21:04
|
|
|
Every solution the government chooses should be affordable, or at least cost effective. These "mistakes" cost the tax payer and our nations force readiness much more then the manufacturer. They gently caress up, and just add it to the governments bill. This billion dollar mistake should be on them, not us. To a certain extent I could see some of the errors as intentional "uncle Sam foots the bill, let's bleed them for an extra 1% in whoopsies and that can go to our year end bonuses" sort of deal But, that's a problem with every big budget defense project.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 13, 2011 22:37
|
|
|
Floating aircraft carrier school, so the Chinese can train up carrier crews who will teach future crews, while exploring the pros and cons of carrier design so they can build there own, and already have competent crews. This one isn't scary but in a decade or two they will have a bunch of them. And back to the aircraft carrier and fighters vs amphibious assault ships with some harriers: if you're expecting a fight and you want to put a few marine battalions on a beach pronto, but whoever you're fighting has some kind of theater ballistic missiles, or shore to ship missiles, an AAS with helicopter ops or a few harriers is far more expendable then a flagship. Flight ops are secondary to vomiting marines onto your coastline, they are going to be close to shore. a little bit of organic air support makes the beachhead more survivable, but the AAS will be in harms way, no matter what, while landing craft disembark. The more fight they can bring along, with them, the better. In this scenario any limited precision sorties to attain air dominance can go down with real fighter/bombers via a carrier a safe distance via in air refueling, in the opening hours of conflict.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 15, 2011 19:21
|
|
|
theclaw posted:China dumping tens or hundreds of billions of dollars into pointless white elephants instead of more effective weapons systems isn't scary at all. It's so that they can politely but firmly tell us "thanks for the offer but we will take care of things" during some future global problem, and laugh as our economy continues to drop off, and the rest of the world doesn't have to put up with our shenanigans. Its a death blow to American global dominance. On AAS's, phanatics post is true only in todays phase of low level conflict. "never" is a strong word and in a larger scale conflict, who is to say what will be at stake and how we will value lives of service men. Today losing any warship is crazy to even think about, but what will tomorrows war bring us? I also never implied the AAS would be fighting alone, just that it is valued less then a CVN would be.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 15, 2011 20:09
|
|
|
It's all highly situational. If you're defending against an invasion, a battery might need to use all of its own missiles on enemy strike aircraft or incoming missiles, letting some smaller stuff through. If you're the most powerful military in the world with a decade of established air & ground dominance then you can use a really expensive weapon if you feel like it just to flex, and hey force protection
|
|
#
¿
Jan 27, 2012 21:07
|
|
|
The day I got my first bb gun is also the day I ran out of action figures. My 9th birthday. mlmp08 posted:When I outgrew playing with army men, my friends and I decided to just make a BB gun marksmanship game of setting up and shooting apart each others armies. They make great little targets for backyard plinking.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 23, 2012 17:04
|
|
|
Figure at current costs we could get way more then the desired 2400 airframes if we bought a mix of F15-SE's, & F16-E/F's, each at probably only a third to half of the cost compared to buying F35's. With the remaining two thirds, spend half of that on further enhancing the low observability of the super vipers and silent eagles, and then some of the other half on a shitload of super tucano's to use as low cost utilitarian bomb slingers in places where there isnt much risk of any enemy air defenses, like today's small wars. Then we can keep our jets shiny and new.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 27, 2012 19:14
|
|
|
The problem with this thought exercise is that if the ruskies were sending out ekranoplan's, there's gonna be a lot of other poo poo flying around, missiles of all types going off, aircraft of sorts at all altitudes etc. Figure that doctrinally the sovs wanted to have a heavy-lift ekrano design for transporting armored units quickly, and ekranoplan carried armor would be some of the most rapid deploying and mobile in the world. So if they are being used, the bear is rolling its tanks out across Europe or wherever the gently caress, and poo poo is going down. They would probably be used to place heavy armor, right at the onset of conflict with other traditional airborne or air asssault forces. Instead of your tanks taking days to get to the front, you're spearheading with heavy armor integrated to your force, a mere hours after invasion. Tanks in places tanks shouldn't be in yet. Huge force multiplyer. So yeah our guys would be kind of busy fighting ww3, maybe some would probably get through just fine, not even factoring the fact that the Russians would be protecting the gently caress out of the things. Probably preemptively bomb the poo poo out of whatever corridor they planned on transporting the ekrano-borne armor through, plus escorts.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 3, 2012 21:24
|
|
|
McNally posted:Y'know, I'm pretty sure America also has people who, at some point in their life, also operated prop-driven planes off of straightdeck carriers. Yet we also have supercarriers and their airgroups. We didn't stop developing tactics or training after our carriers were all blasted to the bottom or dismantled?
|
|
#
¿
May 1, 2012 21:56
|
|
|
Methods aside, I think we can all agree that Japan has plenty of technological know how, money, and precision capability to complete such a project. Sure, the need for an enrichment process adds a certain fixed timeline to the progression towards a working bomb, but I don't think anyone is going to imply the Japanese lack the science or manufacturing know how.
|
|
#
¿
May 14, 2012 23:16
|
|
|
Hey remember hiw cool aircraft are? I'll be at PIMA in arizona by noon tomorrow in arizona. Aircraft requests?
|
|
#
¿
Nov 4, 2012 08:28
|
|
|
Every direction i turn i want to run over to ______ and snap pics or touch it. Then i look the other way and i want to run there. I feel like a 5 year old. Mr. John Spenckle gave a guided tour of sone hangars... His knowledge of airceaft is unreal. Pics are tough, so many aircraft they get in the way! Such a non problem
|
|
#
¿
Nov 4, 2012 21:30
|
|
|
Here's some poo poo:      Pretty cool huh? Remove the "l" from the end of the url for huge as gently caress. My dad's friend gave me this years ago, he was a Grumman engineer.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 7, 2013 19:47
|
|
|
We should have just bought that super fuckton of Super Tucano's as COIN bomb trucks to beat up on browns and then spent the F35 money on F15SE's and F16V's
|
|
#
¿
Mar 8, 2013 03:14
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 2, 2024 09:25 |
|
|
Phanatic posted:The number of nuclear weapons contractors that also do contracting with municipalities at the county level is...small. General electric, General dynamics, General Atomics... All the same GE we love in our kitchen and office! They make everything.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 12, 2013 17:02
|
|