Ukraine Invasion - Please do not post videos showing attacks/similar

[cu3ed]

No I don't ignore it, I rationalise the chance to it being practically zero, but I dont shove my head in the sand and pretend it doesnt exist
Someone was proposing we don't even mention it which I disagree with

Well yes, but theirs no discussion in it, theirs no tactical nuclear war in reality.
They fire theirs we fire back MAD. Everything else is total utter la la picked out of the air guess work.

 

[Harlequin]

Well yes, but theirs no discussion in it, theirs no tactical nuclear war in reality.
They fire theirs we fire back MOD. Everything else is total utter la la picked out of the air guess work.

Spot on, Tactical and Strategic are useful terms - all it means is on who`s real estate the weapons are used. They all have way more blast and thermal damage than the ones used against Japan.

 

[SideWinder]

If a nuke is launched, are we not able to shoot it down safely?

Apologies for the lack of understanding.

I guess it depends on how advanced it is? So if the anti-missile systems in the UK can't see it?

 

[Harlequin]

If a nuke is launched, are we not able to shoot it down safely?

Apologies for the lack of understanding.

I guess it depends on how advanced it is? So if the anti-missile systems in the UK can't see it?

1 or 2 , maybe (using USA systems) - UK hasnt had long range SAM`s for decades - Bloodhound (and the Army controlled Thunderbird) were the last of them

 

[NinjaCool]

Here is the most recent combat losses of the occupiers!

 

[I_M_Weasel]

If a nuke is launched, are we not able to shoot it down safely?

Apologies for the lack of understanding.

I guess it depends on how advanced it is? So if the anti-missile systems in the UK can't see it?

We are very unlikely to be able to stop an ICBM - air dropped, yes we could shoot down bombers, but even then stand off missile strikes would probably get through

 

[Mercenary Keyboard Warrior]

Well yes, but theirs no discussion in it, theirs no tactical nuclear war in reality.
They fire theirs we fire back MAD. Everything else is total utter la la picked out of the air guess work.

Spot on, Tactical and Strategic are useful terms - all it means is on who`s real estate the weapons are used. They all have way more blast and thermal damage than the ones used against Japan.

Not really no

If you talking ICBMs only then use sure

But thats not the totality of the nuclear arsenal

 

[Mercenary Keyboard Warrior]

If a nuke is launched, are we not able to shoot it down safely?

Apologies for the lack of understanding.

I guess it depends on how advanced it is? So if the anti-missile systems in the UK can't see it?

Main problem is when you think of ICBMs which is what many do, the main rocket (missile) is just the delivery mechanism, the warheads separate and fall very quickly and are quite small

Think of it like when we send a satellite into space, the massive rocket and the tiny satellite, its that in effect

 

[SupraWez]

If a nuke is launched, are we not able to shoot it down safely?

Apologies for the lack of understanding.

I guess it depends on how advanced it is? So if the anti-missile systems in the UK can't see it?

The issues with intercepting nukes is its not a single target, there would be multiple warheads and intercepting them all is practically impossible, you may catch some but others will get through.

 

[SupraWez]

Main problem is when you think of ICBMs which is what many do, the main rocket (missile) is just the delivery mechanism, the warheads separate and fall very quickly and are quite small

Think of it like when we send a satellite into space, the massive rocket and the tiny satellite, its that in effect

This

 

[SideWinder]

Great well, lets hope they only try to air drop a nuke on us so we can stop the plane.

Appreciate the rapid replies everyone.

 

[deuse]

I'm glad a lot of you was not around during the Cuban missile crisis.
You would be peeing your pants by now.

 

[I_M_Weasel]

The issues with intercepting nukes is its not a single target, there would be multiple warheads and intercepting them all is practically impossible, you may catch some but others will get through.

And of course missiles also carry decoys which means even more targets that you must destroy - you can't tell the difference between the two.

 

[Uther]

I think the nuclear discussion should be in a separate thread as its a whole new area imo.

There's a war going on with a nuclear armed power, ignoring it won't make that not be the case.

 

[Harlequin]

Not really no

If you talking ICBMs only then use sure

But thats not the totality of the nuclear arsenal

Tactical and Strategic are political terms , to the armed forces a nuke is a nuke (or bucket of instant sunshine)

 

[Uther]

I'm glad a lot of you was not around during the Cuban missile crisis.
You would be peeing your pants by now.

And how old were you in 1962 then, because I can guarantee there were a lot of concerned adults at the time.

 

[deuse]

There's a war going on with a nuclear armed power, ignoring it won't make that not be the case.

Hate to be you when a delivery is late

 

[SPG]

The only shining light is we can get a new COD game with proper real life enemies again and fake English Russian accents.

 

[Harlequin]

Great well, lets hope they only try to air drop a nuke on us so we can stop the plane.

Appreciate the rapid replies everyone.

Mid course MIRV intercepts was the preferred method - but it involves detonating other nuclear weapons near the cloud of warheads to inert them. The USA used the Spartan (LIM-49) for this role ; for terminal interception, the USA used the Sprint Missile , designed for last ditch interception.

Sprint (and yes its massively quick)

Spartan exo-atmosphere interceptor

 

[deuse]

And how old were you in 1962 then, because I can guarantee there were a lot of concerned adults at the time.

6 yoa.
And we was all(14 of us) around the tv\radio.



My late grandfather always said the the russians was full of it.
And he was right.