Mini Nuke in FO3

most things have been said so i wont repeat them, but here is a lil' comment on what you said:
Salkinius said:
Hell, just look at that funny intro vid from the first game where a US soldier shoots a civ (from the looks of it) in the back of the head and then waves to the camera. Granted that the civ most probably isn't a US citizen and they aren't on US soil, but never the less, we know the effect the Vietnam war, with all it's atrocities, had on the population in US.
Click to expand...
the soldiers are on Canadian soil (as announced by the captiontext) and it is a Canadian soldier that he shoots in the back of the head. the combat armor and helmet placed next to his right knee should be a giveaway...
 
xdarkyrex said:
i thought yield and explosive radius don't directly correlate, although the measurement of yield does factor in the size of the explosion?

you can have a high force small radius explosion, yeah?
Click to expand...
I don't see how. High force automatically equals a big radius, since air gets pushed outward. Which is exactly what an explosion is, by the way, air getting pushed outwards at a high velocity.
 
xdarkyrex said:
well there is the temperature of said explosion :D
Click to expand...
Yes, but the temperature is pretty irrelevant. People caught mid-blast of either a conventional or a nuclear explosion will die anyway.

xdarkyrex said:
here, http://www.atomicarchive.com/Effects/effects1.shtml

That article defends your point of view more than mine, but it doesn't really explain the variations in styles of nuclear weaponry.
Click to expand...
Aside from the difference between a dirty and 'clean' bomb, there's only the bunker buster which is aimed at penetrating highly protected structures and detonate inside that structure with a lower payload. But conventional bunker busters exist as well and arguably perform equally well.
 
Sander said:
Yes, but the temperature is pretty irrelevant. People caught mid-blast of either a conventional or a nuclear explosion will die anyway.



Aside from the difference between a dirty and 'clean' bomb, there's only the bunker buster which is aimed at penetrating highly protected structures and detonate inside that structure with a lower payload. But conventional bunker busters exist as well and arguably perform equally well.
Click to expand...

I think the advantage of said bunker buster is the temperature it reaches, which is far higher than anything a conventional explosive could achieve. It'd turn steel reinforcements to liquid.
 
Sorrow said:
Just as plasma bombs could.
Click to expand...

could a plasma bomb heat up more than a nuclear bomb though?
I mean, isn't the fireball at the center of a nuke made of plasma?

I imagine it'd be a lot easier to create plasma than contain plasma in a can, so to speak.
Not that it matters...

this argument isn't terribly poignant anyways, as I don't care to defend the mini-nuke for bethesda.
I was just defending the possibility of it being realistic.
We'll see how it pans out when game the game is released.
 
xdarkyrex said:
Sorrow said:
Just as plasma bombs could.
Click to expand...

could a plasma bomb heat up more than a nuclear bomb though?
I mean, isn't the fireball at the center of a nuke made of plasma?
Click to expand...
The main difference would be that there wouldn't be radiation. Also, using a nuclear bomb, would cause the other side to use their nuclear bombs, which is a bad idea.

xdarkyrex said:
I imagine it'd be a lot easier to create plasma than contain plasma in a can, so to speak.
Not that it matters...
Click to expand...
They have a technology to contain plasma in Fallout, which is proven by the plasma grenade. That's one of the reasons I think that such thing as a nuclear catapult doesn't fit Fallout - wrong technology level.
 
Sorrow said:
They have a technology to contain plasma in Fallout, which is proven by the plasma grenade. That's one of the reasons I think that such thing as a nuclear catapult doesn't fit Fallout - wrong technology level.
Click to expand...

speaking of that, I always kinda wondered how plasma grenades worked.

Mini-nukes do seem a little primitive for the fallout universe.
I've always been under the assumption (based on nothing) that the nuke launcher will be a super-limited concept weapon that never made it to active use, just kinda kept in a storage space somewhere after being denied a contract through the military due to its inefficient function... or something like that :D
 
xdarkyrex said:
speaking of that, I always kinda wondered how plasma grenades worked.
Click to expand...

Unknown. It is probably superheated hydrogen brought into some sort of reaction to become plasma. Note that this, ironically, is a nuclear reaction, in the sense that it involves the nuclei of the molecules involved, it's just not a fusion or fission reaction.

But both laser and plasma rifles are pretty much "impossible physics." Just Science!, y'know, not science.
 
Brother None said:
xdarkyrex said:
speaking of that, I always kinda wondered how plasma grenades worked.
Click to expand...

Unknown. It is probably superheated hydrogen brought into some sort of reaction to become plasma. Note that this, ironically, is a nuclear reaction, in the sense that it involves the nuclei of the molecules involved, it's just not a fusion or fission reaction.

But both laser and plasma rifles are pretty much "impossible physics." Just Science!, y'know, not science.
Click to expand...

nah, laser rifles arent impossible.
they have some laser weapons, give em a few years to miniaturize.
i dont know enough about plasma though.
 
Salkinius said:
I don't find it so hard to sell. Hell, just look at that funny intro vid from the first game where a US soldier shoots a civ (from the looks of it) in the back of the head and then waves to the camera. Granted that the civ most probably isn't a US citizen and they aren't on US soil, but never the less, we know the effect the Vietnam war, with all it's atrocities, had on the population in US.
Click to expand...

The Fallout world never left a 1950s mindset. If I'm not mistaken, a stereotypical 1950s mindset would prohibit one from questioning one's country, no matter what images came from a war zone.

In all honesty, though... We know so little about what the world was like just before the bomb that there may very well have been protests over some of the images from Canada that were coming back to the United States. Indeed, I think that, according to the Van Buren design documents, some of the more highly educated scientists in the Boulder, CO area began protesting U.S. policies and actions.
 
The military men in Mariposa were unhappy to hear what had been going one once they started questioning the scientists.

And yes, laser guns are possible, but not guns that shoot "bolts" of "laser" that cut people clean in two.
 
Brother None said:
And yes, laser guns are possible, but not guns that shoot "bolts" of "laser" that cut people clean in two.
Click to expand...

oh, haha, I didn't even consider the animation.

Yeah, that's pretty unrealistic.
 
The laser guns in Fallout are not entirely impossible, just the animation is unrealistic. But the "bolt" of laser light is pretty standard for sci-fi. A few notable uses of lasers in fiction depict them more-or-less properly; surprisingly an episode of "The Avengers" had a laser that made no visible beam, melted stuff, and fired after a significant startup time and a sound that seemed to be big capacitors charging up, not unlike a camera flashgun. The design of the thing was pure props department, but it was surprisingly grounded for an old British TV show.

Just FYI; man-portable nukes were actually developed, except it was called a "Davy Crocket" and looked like an enormous Panzerfaust. It was meant for the Cold War, 1950s battlefield when we tried nukes in just about every roll. Shit, my dad commanded fighters with Air-to-Air nukes designed to knock down every plane in a 3-mile area.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top