Nagasaki/Hiroshima 1945

RE: Guys forgot a major concept here!!!!!

>air blasts (thermo nuclear blasts) do
>not create Fallout, due to
>the fact that there is
>no dust being thrown into
>the atmosphere as with a
>ground blast. further more, if
>we were to have a
>nuclear war, no nation would
>use their entire arsenal. most
>likely you'd find the use
>of ground blasts accompanied by
>multiple air blasts within the
>central portion of the U.S.
>and mainly thermo nukes along
>the west and east costs....
>strategic hits. also, dont let
>the idea of "Continent Busters"
>and other such devices scare
>you. after 100mega tons it
>takes a dispreportionate amount of
>material to create a blast
>radius any larger.

Well there aren't any nuclear weapons above the 100 megaton mark. You simply don't get as much bang for your uranium kilogram with weapons in the megaton range. Smaller nukes are much more effective.

any ways,
>things wouldnt be as bad
>as people make them out
>to be and nuclear war
>is completely survivable. and yeah,
>the radiation would disepate rather
>quikly... there would be no
>"100 year nuclear winter" or
>any other such scenario.

And Nuclear winters don't exist. Nothing less than an asteroid or comet hitting the earth will cause any real climate change, and those blasts are something like a thousand times more powerful than all the nuclear weapons ever produced.

-Xotor-

[div align=center]

http://www.poseidonet.f2s.com/files/nostupid.gif
[/div]
 
RE: Guys forgot a major concept here!!!!!

>Well there aren't any nuclear weapons
>above the 100 megaton mark.
>You simply don't get as much
>bang for your uranium kilogram
>with weapons in the megaton range.
>Smaller nukes are much more effective.

yeah, which is what i said... anything over 100 megatons is useless.


>And Nuclear winters don't exist.
>Nothing less than an asteroid or
>comet hitting the earth will cause
>any real climate change, and those
>blasts are something like a thousand
>times more powerful than all the nuclear
>weapons ever produced.

in short, my definition of a "nuclear winter" is basically the period after the nuclear holocaust in which the radioactive dust settles... which would be very short. so, yes, i agree with you completely. the idea of the ice caps melting and the sun being blocked out for years is horse shit.
 
One nuclear/atomic bomb (quite the same) cause lots of damage, you know. For example, i know that if only ONE bomb would explose in France (where i live) all medical, health facilities of the entire country would be overstep ! And France is not one of the less developped country in the world... So radiation, fire, wind (well, go take a look on the beginning of Fallout's manual :o) damage everything. And i dont think that government had built (for all countries) deep wells and all that.

By the way, it was not Einstein's team in Los Alamos. Einstein only wrote to Einsenhower (if i remenber the good president) to built the bomb because he thought nazis were buiding it. When he heard that they werent, he wrote again in order to convince not building the bomb. For the all rest of his life, he regreted the building of the bomb.
 
Ok, i look in my french/english dictionnary, and now, i'm sure of the definition of nucleus :) .
When you slice an atom, in fact you slice the nucleus ! How could you slice electron belt ? You cant ! I'm not sure, but they certainly change of belt, produce photons (that's sure), and the atom take energy off (because of the fission) so there is heat and all things not fun at all, which happened in a nuclear explosion :) . So slice an atom= slice a nucleus. What happened in an atomic/nuclear bomb is the same =>nucleus/nuclear :) it's atomic fission. Same as in power plants.
 
>>Oh do you actually think that we used ground spies? Most of the covert activity made use of spy planes which were out of range of practically any of Russia's anti-air or detection methods. The Russians knew we were spying anyway, but due to their inferior force and the precipate that they would be the loser in a nuclear battle, they probably chose to ignore it. Russia was never able to compete with the United States' nuclear program.
<<

Well, you thing that only US spies other countries ? My country spies yours, his country spies mine... Russia spies US, US spies Russia, Japan spies UK, etc... Everyone know it ! everyones do it ! The aim is having more information on the other country than him on you !

>>Even if all the nuclear weapons on the planet, ever made, were detonated at once, the sun would not be blocked or radiation levels raised to such a level that the human race would be exterminated (assuming the nukes don't target the humans themselves).
<<

If all nuclear bombs on the planet were detonated at once, earth would explose. Because it's the same as destroy a building : You put lots of bomb everywhere. The energy is so huge that the earth would diseapear. I dont know how many bombs are yet on earth, but i think it's a lot. If we take yours : 12000+21000, maybe 5000 for each other countries. = maybe 100000 warheads.
 
RE: That's not accurate

Well, tchernobyl is the only case known by the general public. If scandinavian countries hadnt warned other countries, tchernobyl would ever be an annonymous city in ukrain. I think other cases happened, and not only in russia.
 
I don't think so.

>If all nuclear bombs on the
>planet were detonated at once,
>earth would explose. Because it's
>the same as destroy a
>building : You put lots
>of bomb everywhere. The energy
>is so huge that the
>earth would diseapear. I dont
>know how many bombs are
>yet on earth, but i
>think it's a lot. If
>we take yours : 12000+21000,
>maybe 5000 for each other
>countries. = maybe 100000 warheads.

I take it you meant to write "explode." No, the earth would not explode, it wouldn't even tremble.

Let me put nuclear explosions into perspective for you:

- One 6.5 magnitude earthquake produces as much energy as a thousand Hiroshima-sized nuclear explosions.

- The earth itself is bombarded with more energy from the sun per day than all the nuclear weapons in history combined. Each square meter on earth, neglecting what the atmosphere absorbs receives about 1380 joules of energy per SECOND. Each ton of TNT produces 4.18 x 109 joules of energy. Now let's assume EVERY one of those "100,000" (actually around 50,000 worldwide) nuclear weapons are 100 megaton nuclear weapons. That would be equivilent to 100,000 x 100,000,000 x 4.18 x 109 joules = 4.5562E+16 (4,556,200,000,000,000) Joules of energy.

The Sahara Desert has 9,150,000 square kilometers which is 9.15E+12 (9,150,000,000,000) square meters. Now multiply that by 1380 joules of energy and you get 1.2627E+16 (12,627,000,000,000,000) joules of energy *PER SECOND*.

Therefore the Sahara Desert receives more energy from the sun, PER SECOND, almost three times as much, than every nuclear weapon in history, and also assuming every nuclear weapon in history had a yield of 100 megatons which is blatently overassuming the yield of the average nuclear weapon (only one >= 100 megaton nuclear weapon has ever been created).

Energy for nuclear weapons vs Earthquakes, and other info:

http://giseis.alaska.edu/Input/affiliated/lahr/magnitude/energy.txt

Sun Energy Info:

http://www-spof.gsfc.nasa.gov/stargaze/Sun7enrg.htm

Sahara Desert Info:

http://www.ambio.kva.se/1999/Nr7_99/nov99_3.html

- The amount of energy released by the hypothetical 100,000 100-megaton nuclear bombs (4,556,200,000,000,000 joules) is actually less than the energy produced by a single 8.0 magnitude earthquake.

- Comets/asteroids that have collided with Earth have produced craters over *THREE HUNDRED MILES* in diameter. These are comets/asteroids that are over twelve miles in diameter. Compare that to a nuclear explosion. The earth still exists doesn't it?

- See those craters on the moon? The smallest of the visible craters probably produced more energy than every nuclear weapon in history combined.

And you think a bunch of pint-sized nuclear explosions will even put a nick into the earth? Nuclear explosions may seem huge by our standards, but in realistic terms, they are completely insignificant.

Just as we consider Mount Everest to be a huge mountain, realistically, if you were to take the earth and shrink it down to the size of a billiard (pool) ball, the surface would feel just as smooth.

-Xotor-

[div align=center]

http://www.poseidonet.f2s.com/files/nostupid.gif
[/div]
 
>One nuclear/atomic bomb (quite the same)
>cause lots of damage, you
>know. For example, i know
>that if only ONE bomb
>would explose in France (where
>i live) all medical, health
>facilities of the entire country
>would be overstep ! And
>France is not one of
>the less developped country in
>the world... So radiation, fire,
>wind (well, go take a
>look on the beginning of
>Fallout's manual :o) damage everything.
>And i dont think that
>government had built (for all
>countries) deep wells and all
>that.

One nuclear bomb would hardly cause that much damage, even a 100 megaton bomb in the middle of Paris. Paris would be gone, but the extent of the damage would be confined to about 25 square miles.

Maybe a *comet* hitting France could wipe out that entire area, but not a single nuclear bomb, and especially the nuclear bombs in use today.

-Xotor-

[div align=center]

http://www.poseidonet.f2s.com/files/nostupid.gif
[/div]
 
some of you may have missed the point of battle just a tad..

You all make an interesting arguement... But i believe that you all missed the point of war.. or even a battle.
To me it seems that you all got into a .. well "Penis" battle, on who would do what to who and with what.. lamens terms.. who's is bigger and who can piss the furtherst.
Man has and im sure will only go to war for a few select things.. most of them being as simple as :.. Greed.. Religion (Political Beliefs) and Women.. why else would we fight?
Prime examples are visable all through history.. and they are all the same in ideals.
Hitler believed that Germans were the supreme beings and that all should serve his empire.. nothing new, just a simple fight over religion.. Egypt did it with the Jews.. England had the holly wars with the Middle East... Gangus Kong with the Chinese.. and so on... that covers Religion excluding the great Communisum vs Democrocy.
As far as Greed goes.. Prime Example of this for modern days would be good old Saddam.... "Rag" head master mind.
In the beginning of 1991 Kuwait discovers a nice big old pile of oil sitting just out of reach of saddams back yard.. and it's worth Trillions..so Saddam im sure did the "math".. yeah what the hell... i'll waste 60% of my wepons resources.. on plundering this place... let off a few of my new "toys".. on those that don't want me to have a great monopoly on the worlds oil surplies.. stock pile as much oil as i can...

He was bloody smart in not making the same mistakes as hitler made... he charged in, distroying simple things that made day to day living simple in Kuwait... if your busy trying to look for your next meal your not going to be a problem.. it was all nothing more then a "slide of hand" trick... give the public something else to look at while your doing exactly what you want to do... and now where paying for it.
he was seriously smart in tourching the oil wells .. as it created an oil shortage which we are feeling the effects of today.. so the price of petrol almost doubled in alot of places.. and where now having to let Saddam export his oil at twice it's original price.. and 10- 1 it's what he took from Kuwait anyway.

What has all this got to do with Fallout you may ask is everything.. Rule one destroy and control everything as quick as possible.. so you take out communitcations.. you take out power.. you even take out simple needs as food.. becaseu yoru already self reliant.. what do you want there farms for?.. a soldier will only fight away from home with a full stomach and the knoledge that his family are taken care of.

I have fully injoyed the Fallout series... and am looking forward to getting my hands on Fallout Tatics after playing the demo.. (alot of cool new ideas in there that i like.. but the only possible suggestion that i may have is with the multi level maps available.. could you please add a button that would allow us to flick between the levels.. so that way it's not automated.. we can flick between them manually like in the Xcom Series Ufo enemy unknowen, terror from the deep, apocolypse ect.. (the ladder keys)).
 
Please get to the point!

>You all make an interesting arguement...
>But i believe that you
>all missed the point of
>war.. or even a battle.
>
>To me it seems that you
>all got into a ..
>well "Penis" battle, on who
>would do what to who
>and with what.. lamens terms..
>who's is bigger and who
>can piss the furtherst.
>Man has and im sure will
>only go to war for
>a few select things.. most
>of them being as simple
>as :.. Greed.. Religion (Political
>Beliefs) and Women.. why else
>would we fight?
>Prime examples are visable all through
>history.. and they are all
>the same in ideals.
>Hitler believed that Germans were the
>supreme beings and that all
>should serve his empire.. nothing
>new, just a simple fight
>over religion.. Egypt did it
>with the Jews.. England had
>the holly wars with the
>Middle East... Gangus Kong with
>the Chinese.. and so on...
>that covers Religion excluding the
>great Communisum vs Democrocy.
>As far as Greed goes.. Prime
>Example of this for modern
>days would be good old
>Saddam.... "Rag" head master mind.
>
>In the beginning of 1991 Kuwait
>discovers a nice big old
>pile of oil sitting just
>out of reach of saddams
>back yard.. and it's worth
>Trillions..so Saddam im sure did
>the "math".. yeah what the
>hell... i'll waste 60% of
>my wepons resources.. on plundering
>this place... let off a
>few of my new "toys"..
>on those that don't want
>me to have a great
>monopoly on the worlds oil
>surplies.. stock pile as much
>oil as i can...
>
>He was bloody smart in not
>making the same mistakes as
>hitler made... he charged in,
>distroying simple things that made
>day to day living simple
>in Kuwait... if your busy
>trying to look for your
>next meal your not going
>to be a problem.. it
>was all nothing more then
>a "slide of hand" trick...
>give the public something else
>to look at while your
>doing exactly what you want
>to do... and now where
>paying for it.
>he was seriously smart in tourching
>the oil wells .. as
>it created an oil shortage
>which we are feeling the
>effects of today.. so the
>price of petrol almost doubled
>in alot of places.. and
>where now having to let
>Saddam export his oil at
>twice it's original price.. and
>10- 1 it's what he
>took from Kuwait anyway.
>
>What has all this got to
>do with Fallout you may
>ask is everything..

No, really, what the *hell* was the point of the previous three or four paragraphs? Honestly, if you're going to blab, at least make it coherent to the topic.

>Rule one
>destroy and control everything as
>quick as possible.. so you
>take out communitcations.. you take
>out power.. you even take
>out simple needs as food..
>becaseu yoru already self reliant..
>what do you want there
>farms for?.. a soldier will
>only fight away from home
>with a full stomach and
>the knoledge that his family
>are taken care of.

Oh I'm sure nations will strike another country's *farmland* before targetting their military installments. What, are nations going to carpet-bomb their enemy's FARMLAND? Oh yeah, we'll *starve* them out while they're mobilizing into our nations.. that's right.. Puh-leeze. It is quite possibly the most worthless target to attack. Rather the nation will try to wipe out their enemy's military installations, air-strips, naval bases, munition factories, and other *military targets*.

>I have fully injoyed the Fallout
>series... and am looking forward
>to getting my hands on
>Fallout Tatics after playing the
>demo.. (alot of cool new
>ideas in there that i
>like.. but the only possible
>suggestion that i may have
>is with the multi level
>maps available.. could you please
>add a button that would
>allow us to flick between
>the levels.. so that way
>it's not automated.. we can
>flick between them manually like
>in the Xcom Series Ufo
>enemy unknowen, terror from the
>deep, apocolypse ect.. (the ladder
>keys)).

And again, you drift off to another tangent...

-Xotor-

[div align=center]

http://www.poseidonet.f2s.com/files/nostupid.gif
[/div]
 
RE: I don't think so.

ok :)

You should be right, but i heard about it (no, it was not in planet of the apes :D). An asteroid "hit" the earth on one point, but many bombs are all around the planet, so the energy is everywhere... if u know what i mean (i dont know how to espress it rightly)

voila, voila... But when i think a little about it, yes, you right, mankind power is insignifiant compare to nature.
 
no, i wasnt say that france would be wipe out, but that all hospitals and all that wouldnt be enough to answer the emergency.
 
RE: I don't think so.

>ok :)
>
>You should be right, but i
>heard about it (no, it
>was not in planet of
>the apes :D). An asteroid
>"hit" the earth on one
>point, but many bombs are
>all around the planet, so
>the energy is everywhere... if
>u know what i mean
>(i dont know how to
>espress it rightly)
>
>voila, voila... But when i think
>a little about it, yes,
>you right, mankind power is
>insignifiant compare to nature.

There aren't enough bombs to cover the planet in nuclear fire, let alone blow it up. The earth receives more energy from the sun all around the planet every second than every nuclear weapon ever produced. Even if all the nukes were detonated in the core of the planet it would not make much difference. I highly doubt every nuke on earth could even sink all of England.

-Xotor-

[div align=center]

http://www.poseidonet.f2s.com/files/nostupid.gif
[/div]
 
Thanks alot DarkUnderlord...

BECAUSE OF YOU, I've read 5 pages of text concerning nuclear arms, military strategy concerning nuclear weapons,speculations, approximations, calculations, and even history@!Shit, even alternate history!

Gotta admit though, I've learned more in the NMA boards, and other internet boards, than one semester of any class in my school.
 
RE: I don't think so.

yes, i just read in a science magazine that a solar eruption is superior (in power) to the explode of millions thermonuclear bombs
 
RE: I don't think so.

>yes, i just read in a
>science magazine that a solar
>eruption is superior (in power)
>to the explode of millions
>thermonuclear bombs

Let's just say that if we didn't have our magnetic field here on earth, we'd be fried.

-Xotor-

[div align=center]

http://www.poseidonet.f2s.com/files/nostupid.gif
[/div]
 
Damnit.

About halfway through reading this thread, I thought to myself, 'Ah, but you're wrong, Xotor!' And hurriedly read through the rest of the thread so I could write my brilliant reply.

Then Xotor $%#^ed my brilliant plan.

You see, coincidently, I recently read a poster in my school lobby or somewhere like that that 'If all the nuclear weapons detonated, the world would be destroyed 13 times over'.

At the time, naturally, I thought it was entirely possibly, after seeing footage of nuclear bombs and how incredibly huge they are, etc.

And then Xotor made them sound as harmful as a tennis ball bomb.

So, in conclusion: I hate you Xotor. Stop being so smart.

... j/k

~Dyar
 
RE: Damnit.

>You see, coincidently, I recently read
>a poster in my school
>lobby or somewhere like that
>that 'If all the nuclear
>weapons detonated, the world would
>be destroyed 13 times over'.

Actually the claim is that the USA and USSR have enough nuclear weapons to destroy the human race 13 times over. This is called "Overkill" and is correct, providing everyone on the planet stands in nice circles with a population density of downtown Hiroshima and Nagasaki and an air-bursted 20kt nuclear warhead is detonated in the middle of them. That's not likely.

-Xotor-

[div align=center]

http://www.poseidonet.f2s.com/files/nostupid.gif
[/div]
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top