If the Great War was fought without nuclear weapons?
- Thread starter Sn1p3r187
- Start date
I wouldn't know. My understanding of it might be partly tainted with Bethesdaverse lore since a lot of that depends on the timeline of the Great War.
As it goes: The technology was just then being implemented, but was too little to late. Places like Detroit were already experiencing breakdown in the public order and most the technology was used primarily for military purposes first. But that doesn't satisfy me since they had fission reactors as a transitory source of power and, if I'm not mistaken, fissible uranium is common, if not "clean." And in Bethesdaverse, was used to power trivial things like cars. (And possibly the Fallout 2 car before they cut that content and went with a battery charged from energy weapon ammo.)
But petroleum is used for a lot more than energy, I suppose.
As it goes: The technology was just then being implemented, but was too little to late. Places like Detroit were already experiencing breakdown in the public order and most the technology was used primarily for military purposes first. But that doesn't satisfy me since they had fission reactors as a transitory source of power and, if I'm not mistaken, fissible uranium is common, if not "clean." And in Bethesdaverse, was used to power trivial things like cars. (And possibly the Fallout 2 car before they cut that content and went with a battery charged from energy weapon ammo.)
But petroleum is used for a lot more than energy, I suppose.
Dr Fallout
Centurion
Because maybe they weren't interested in those power sources, and that it was too late?
Sn1p3r187
Carolinian Shaolin Monk
You're right. Sorry that was a bit of a stupid question. I think I should also make a thread on the changes in China leading up to the Great War. Generally Maoist policies actually encouraged a peaceful coexistence with the Western world. So likely maybe by the late 2030's or early 2040's the CCP is overtaken by Marxist radicals wanting to reform policies in China or make China far more nationalistic in relation with the Soviet Union.
It really isn't a stupid question. There's a lot of Fallout technology that doesn't make sense to me, mostly because the writers don't care about realism for all the obvious reasons.
They have fairly sophisticated AI's on supercomputers and GPS functions on a PipBoy, just to name a couple of examples. But they're still using reel-tapes, vacuum tubes and whatever the heck holodisks are. So their computer technology is surprisingly powerful despite how bulky it is.
Once you have Bethesdaverse, then you have personal computers sitting on desks. Ignoring the fact they're still working after all that time, that strikes me as anachronistic. As I think the notion of a Steve Jobs or Bill Gates style PC revolution is completely unheard of in their timeline and that cultural mindset is completely alien to them.
I would've otherwise assumed computers would've been purely used for academic, military or for specialized engineering tasks (e.g. nuclear reactors and running the Vaults). And most business offices handle clerical tasks in large rooms with ladies and gents sitting in rows at desks in the style of assembly-line or a mass-production. Documents go in, you do your assigned tasks for the day, documents go out.
Of course, if they can make miniaturized fusion cells and fission batteries, one wonders why they didn't just make a smaller battery and pull the power off a grid powered by fission. But to be fair, while uranium is common, not all of it's the fissible U-235 isotope and not all ores are equally high grade or accessible. Australia apparently has the lionshare of the good stuff. And while "relatively" common, we've overthrown governments for less. (Chilean President Allende nationalizing copper mining, amongst other things.)
http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/Nuclear-fuel-cycle/Uranium-Resources/Supply-of-Uranium/
So even if they didn't fight the war over oil, then they'd probably still have other Resources to fight over. You dig up all the high-grade easy-to-reach stuff first. Once that's starts dwindling, the infrastructure and market gives you incentive to go after the increasingly harder-to-get-stuff.
They have fairly sophisticated AI's on supercomputers and GPS functions on a PipBoy, just to name a couple of examples. But they're still using reel-tapes, vacuum tubes and whatever the heck holodisks are. So their computer technology is surprisingly powerful despite how bulky it is.
Once you have Bethesdaverse, then you have personal computers sitting on desks. Ignoring the fact they're still working after all that time, that strikes me as anachronistic. As I think the notion of a Steve Jobs or Bill Gates style PC revolution is completely unheard of in their timeline and that cultural mindset is completely alien to them.
I would've otherwise assumed computers would've been purely used for academic, military or for specialized engineering tasks (e.g. nuclear reactors and running the Vaults). And most business offices handle clerical tasks in large rooms with ladies and gents sitting in rows at desks in the style of assembly-line or a mass-production. Documents go in, you do your assigned tasks for the day, documents go out.
Of course, if they can make miniaturized fusion cells and fission batteries, one wonders why they didn't just make a smaller battery and pull the power off a grid powered by fission. But to be fair, while uranium is common, not all of it's the fissible U-235 isotope and not all ores are equally high grade or accessible. Australia apparently has the lionshare of the good stuff. And while "relatively" common, we've overthrown governments for less. (Chilean President Allende nationalizing copper mining, amongst other things.)
http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/Nuclear-fuel-cycle/Uranium-Resources/Supply-of-Uranium/
So even if they didn't fight the war over oil, then they'd probably still have other Resources to fight over. You dig up all the high-grade easy-to-reach stuff first. Once that's starts dwindling, the infrastructure and market gives you incentive to go after the increasingly harder-to-get-stuff.
Last edited:
Sn1p3r187
Carolinian Shaolin Monk
Good point man. Now another issue I'd be concerned about is relating this to real life. I think the idea of MAD probably ensures that we'll do our best to avoid a nuclear conflict. But I think Genetically engineered viruses or bacteria and global environmental disasters could play out an apocalypse for us by 2077 lol. Eh consider what I'm doing a branch off and comparison between reality and a work of fiction like likely would've heralded truth in 1962 or 1983.
ZigzagPX4
The Swiftness of the Ranger
Okay, okay. Let's get to the theory of what if the Great War was fought with conventional warfare, not biological or nuclear WMDs. Or any sort of WMDs, actually. Any guesses on how it would go? Or at least, how it would begin? It would start as a continuation of the Resources War, of course. Wait, would it be a Great War at all without WMDs?
Scipio the Elder
Whiskey Blues
That would bring up the question of why use the resources to begin with. Massive bombings, air power, and logistics for ground units is costly. I'd see it more possible that a few massive bombing campaigns would be done instead of all out invasion/ground war. Carpet bombing if you will. If not that then more investment into orbital weapon systems. In all likely hood the U.S. of this universe has something like Ronald Reagan's "Star Wars", or SDI, in fruition. How far fetched would be be to have a massive coil gun on the moon acting as an artillery piece for the U.S. military? Given we know they were working on an orbital laser, that works, there might be other things as well.
Just seems better to develop new technology that can do the same job for less compared to using traditional means.
Didn't Van Buren have an orbital station housing nukes to be dropped in orbit?
Just seems better to develop new technology that can do the same job for less compared to using traditional means.
Didn't Van Buren have an orbital station housing nukes to be dropped in orbit?
Sn1p3r187
Carolinian Shaolin Monk
Yes it did. In this likely case it'd probably be kinetic weapons made of tungsten launched at 20,000 mph and hitting with the force of a 100 ton earthquake bomb. I still the end result of this conflict would still be likely civilization falling a part on the scale of the U.S and China. But radiation wouldn't be much of a concern. And vaults would likely be filled.
Scipio the Elder
Whiskey Blues
I was thinking of a weapon just like that due to the wonderful U.N. ban on orbital weapons of that purpose. End result is still the same but it might prolong how long the U.S. would stay "around".
Dr Fallout
Centurion
While the Fallout technology doesn't make sense, asking about why the governments didn't use other resources is stupid. For one, most natural resources are expensive and inefficient on a country sized scaled, while other technology such as nano-tech was being sidelined or even ignored (possibly seen as impossible) for military technology as the world became more hostile.
Brinksmanship. You're sort of committed to an "us versus them" mentality where it's better to use your resources to head off your enemy's development so they don't gain an advantage over you. And because neither side is willing to give an inch, the fight to use resources to hurt the other party excalates.
Like if you're just trying to launch satellites and develop moon bases then you still have a Space Race by way of orbital bombardment instead of ICBM's. You're still going to want to proliferate your arsenal and try to deny or knock out as much of your enemy's. Any and all territory or resources you can use to boost your space development is going to be hotly contested.
Scipio the Elder
Whiskey Blues
Did not think of that. Good point.
Instead of nukes we'd have Chinese space guns bombing the U.S. and vice versa. Heh.
Instead of nukes we'd have Chinese space guns bombing the U.S. and vice versa. Heh.
Dr Fallout
Centurion
Space guns? Unless they find an explosive that can rival the pure destructive power of an atom bomb, they're going to be just launching missiles that can be launched by battleships from space, unless of course they find some alternative in the timeline like chemical or biological warfare.
Kinetic energy scales with the square of speed. A kinetic tungsten or depleted uranium impactor moving at several km/sec can have the destructive force of a small nuclear weapon when all that energy is released on contact with a target.
Sn1p3r187
Carolinian Shaolin Monk
That is true. It can range anywhere from 75 tons to at least 120 tons.
Dr Fallout
Centurion
Great, but you first have to research it and create it. Any ideas how?
Sn1p3r187
Carolinian Shaolin Monk
Another thing I've been wondering is how would the non nuclear great war affect the brotherhood of steel in years to come. Would they have still formed? Would they still be trying to hoard technology?
What do you mean by researching it? It was part of the research that went into the old Star Wars anti-ICBM program, it's part of the research into real-world electromagnetic guns and hyper-velocity missiles, and it's part of astrophysics research in the form of meteorites. Kinetic warheads have also been part of sci-fi for awhile; the most recent that I know of is Schlock Mercenary's c-sabots.
As BairdEC said, it's already been researched, we could do it tomorrow if we really wanted. All you need to do is put an extremely dense "dart" in orbit, with a standard rocket, and when you want to attack, fire another small rocket motor for a deorbit burn.
Essentially what you're doing is using the fuel of the launch rocket to put a lot of energy into the projectile. In space, there is no air resistance to drain that energy, so it will keep whizzing around in orbit until you want to destroy something.
The kinetic energy of a 10 tonne projectile at orbital velocity is about 640GJ, or 150 tonnes of TNT. Heavier projectiles and more elliptical orbits could increase this to maybe 2.8TJ, so 600 tonnes of TNT, with current rockets like the Delta IV Heavy. The Saturn V could put four times that much in orbit, so would get you 2.3kT of destructive power.
This is what half a kiloton of TNT will do: