Soldato
How about the old bus station being that run down and derelict it was used in an apocalypse movie called The girl with all the gifts. 80% of S-o-T is a **** hole.
Nuclear War! What would you do?
- Thread starter Nitefly
- Start date
How about the old bus station being that run down and derelict it was used in an apocalypse movie called The girl with all the gifts. 80% of S-o-T is a **** hole.
Soldato
This was a UK advert from the 80s
Soldato
Hope that all that time playing Fallout games wasn't wasted, after all.
Having just purchased a new Kia, hope the spares aren't made in SK or I'm cussed, come service time.
Having just purchased a new Kia, hope the spares aren't made in SK or I'm cussed, come service time.
Soldato
Oh God. I need to go to Homebase. Do I need matte or gloss finish? Will eggshell work? I fancy going shabby chic, I wouldn't want to sacrifice class just because armageddon has been unleashed.
I've just heard the alarm, but there were no birds chirping in the background.
It this a false alarm or...?
Associate
It would destroy most of London agreed . But again you are comparing to Hiroshima bomb and calculating the damage against that . Observers 60 miles away could feel the heat of the bomb but it didn't burn them .And a 100 megaton bomb is impractical as most of the energy would blast off into space . But those weapons are history and were only made as they couldn't hit a target and missed by miles .Now they can put a missle through a front door and they are just not needed
Associate
Of course its impressive . People dont understand the way nuclear bombs damage is calculated and always do so against little boy and fat man .Like i said just because its X amount of times more powerful does not equal that same amount of damage . 60 miles away doors and windows were blown in the houses were not destroyed ,many think this bomb destroys everything in 100 mile radius or something when that isnt the case
Soldato
There's a secret underground nuclear bunker near to me. Or at least, that's what the sign post says. I'd probably head there and hope they let me in.
I'm not that's just the predicted effects that bomb would have on London/the south east. The reason most predictions mimic the effects of the Hiroshima bomb but bigger and not a random test on some remote island is because that's a real world use and so a real world detonation of a more powerful bomb follows that style.
Associate
But 90 percent of the buildings in those Japanese cities were wood framed buildings so the damage was far greater . The bigger bomb doesn't equal bigger damage and nuclear weapons designer will tell you exactly that .
If the blast radii are bigger then they engulf more things and more people, more things and people hit equals more damage.
Soldato
Plus, I would imagine it's highly unlikely the USA would launch a nuclear weapon, even if NK launched one.
Instead, I'd expect a conventional strike to take out all of NK's offensive capabilities, then they'd take out all of the command and control centres.
Basically, how they did Iraq. I expect the majority of the army would gladly surrender once the command structure is defeated.
Instead, I'd expect a conventional strike to take out all of NK's offensive capabilities, then they'd take out all of the command and control centres.
Basically, how they did Iraq. I expect the majority of the army would gladly surrender once the command structure is defeated.
Associate
The tsar bomb was 3000 times more powerful than the Hiroshima bomb that destroyed just under 4 square miles of the city . 4x 3000 = 12000 square mile and thats my point people calculate the damage via this method when its completely wrong .
Well, yeah that's correct, but why are you ranting at me about it when I haven't done anything like that? lol.
Soldato
You can't just times the blast size in square meters by how much more powerful it is
Inverse cube
Jus sayin.
Inverse cube
Jus sayin.
Soldato
The Tsar bomb had a total devastation circumference of 22 miles.
Plus, it was so heavy that they had to completely gut an aircraft to be able to hold it, and the crew of that plane only just survived the blast themselves. So in reality, it's not really a likely combat weapon - or something you'd expect to be fired on the tip of an ICBM.
Plus, it was so heavy that they had to completely gut an aircraft to be able to hold it, and the crew of that plane only just survived the blast themselves. So in reality, it's not really a likely combat weapon - or something you'd expect to be fired on the tip of an ICBM.
Unless I misread it he was doing that as an example of how idiots miscalculate it.
Soldato
Oh i see.
The true way of calculating involves taking a picture at the same distance away with a banana for scale
The true way of calculating involves taking a picture at the same distance away with a banana for scale
Soldato
I would find a large wall that seemed sturdy enough to survive the blast, and then I would adopt a classic 'Walk Like An Egyptian' pose and await immortality as the grooviest nuclear shadow there has ever been.