HH 59 : The Destroyer of Worlds
-
- Posts: 4116
- Joined: Tue Nov 29, 2016 11:37 pm
Re: HH 59 : The Destroyer of Worlds
Goddamn mobile steppe formations will always win
No man's life, liberty, or property are safe while the legislature is in session
-
- Posts: 36399
- Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2016 3:22 am
Re: HH 59 : The Destroyer of Worlds
The N-bomb would have been pretty effective, that's why we wanted them for CENTAG, smaller blast, but exponentially more radiation in a concentrated flash, neutrons and gamma rays to the max, to penetrate hardened materials, goes rigtht through buildings, goes right through armor, goes right through nuke suits, goes quite deep into the ground, H-bombs for deterence, but if/when deterence fails and you actually have to fight the nuclear war, that's when you need the N-bomb.
Nec Aspera Terrent
-
- Posts: 4116
- Joined: Tue Nov 29, 2016 11:37 pm
Re: HH 59 : The Destroyer of Worlds
That's still anti-personnel only, correct?
I guess it doesn't matter if the tank is still running if all the people to drive it are dead.
I guess it doesn't matter if the tank is still running if all the people to drive it are dead.
No man's life, liberty, or property are safe while the legislature is in session
-
- Posts: 36399
- Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2016 3:22 am
Re: HH 59 : The Destroyer of Worlds
Exactly, we'd pop them over the tank formations, the neutrons and gamma rays are so intense and able to bypass solid materials, that they just fry the tankers inside the tanks, not with heat, with pure radiation, in a dose so massive, that they are dead men walking, and then not walking anymore, within a very short time.California wrote:That's still anti-personnel only, correct?
I guess it doesn't matter if the tank is still running if all the people to drive it are dead.
Radiation poisining at an exponentially accelerated rate, incapacitates you within minutes, kills you within hours, the radiation burns are so bad, that you can't even see within a couple minutes of being exposed, never mind drive a tank, would literally melt the eyes right out of your head.
There's not even much fallout, the non biological is not really effected, it just goes right through metal and concrete, just kills the people inside the tanks and bunkers, like a camera flash, the tanks and bunkers themselves are not even that radioactive afterwards, hose that tank down, and you could jump in and drive it away.
Nec Aspera Terrent
-
- Posts: 2421
- Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2016 11:07 am
Re: HH 59 : The Destroyer of Worlds
Smitty-48 wrote:We went over all this shit in NATO CENTAG constantly back in the 80's, when all the bombs were going to be H-bombs, and the conclusion we kept coming back to was; effective against population centers and industrial targets, not so effective against armies in the field, actually many ways to deflect the effects of even an H-bomb, when you are dispersed, dug in, and prepared, which is why the Carter and Reagan Administrations actually wanted to switch to N-Bombs, because in the end, even the H-Bomb wasn't hot enough to reliably kill Soviet tank formations.
Wow...I had no idea.
There is a time for good men to do bad things.
For fuck sake, 1984 is NOT an instruction manual!
__________
For fuck sake, 1984 is NOT an instruction manual!
__________
-
- Posts: 36399
- Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2016 3:22 am
Re: HH 59 : The Destroyer of Worlds
Bear in mind, the reason why development of the N-Bomb was halted, was not that it wasn't going to be effective, the reason is that it was going to be way too effective, the result being that nuclear war would become exponentially more likely, because the N-bomb wasn't just exponentially more effective than an H-bomb, the lack of significant fallout, also made them exponentially more usable, thus, widespread deployment of the N-bomb, would actually destabilize deterence, because both sides would now have a weapon which could be used, without actually blowing up the world.
Nec Aspera Terrent
-
- Posts: 15157
- Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2016 9:47 am
Re: HH 59 : The Destroyer of Worlds
Those of us old enough to have been in middle school in the 70s and high school in the 80s probably remember how freaking scary the N-bomb was on the nightly news and the propaganda media we consumed, to teenagers, anyway. No wonder we drank and smoked and fucked so much. :drunk:Smitty-48 wrote:Bear in mind, the reason why development of the N-Bomb was halted, was not that it wasn't going to be effective, the reason is that it was going to be way too effective, the result being that nuclear war would become exponentially more likely, because the N-bomb wasn't just exponentially more effective than an H-bomb, the lack of significant fallout, also made them exponentially more usable, thus, widespread deployment of the N-bomb, would actually destabilize deterence, because both sides would now have a weapon which could be used, without actually blowing up the world.
-
- Posts: 36399
- Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2016 3:22 am
Re: HH 59 : The Destroyer of Worlds
Well, for those of us at the sharp end, it sounded like a plan, because we felt like there would be a nuclear war eventually, just by misapprension, miscalculation, or mistake, so better to go to the N-bombs, because it was just a matter of time, and at least with the N-bombs, the sun would come up the next day; even if you had killed a billion people, there was still a future civilization after an N-bomb war, whereas with an H-bomb war, not so much.Fife wrote:Those of us old enough to have been in middle school in the 70s and high school in the 80s probably remember how freaking scary the N-bomb was on the nightly news and the propaganda media we consumed, to teenagers, anyway. No wonder we drank and smoked and fucked so much. :drunk:
Nec Aspera Terrent
-
- Posts: 15157
- Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2016 9:47 am
Re: HH 59 : The Destroyer of Worlds
Smitty-48 wrote:Well, for those of us at the sharp end, it sounded like a plan, because we felt like there would be a nuclear war eventually, just by misapprension, miscalculation, or mistake, so better to go to the N-bombs, because it was just a matter of time, and at least with the N-bombs, the sun would come up the next day; even if you had killed a billion people, there was still a future civilization after an N-bomb war, whereas with an H-bomb war, not so much.Fife wrote:Those of us old enough to have been in middle school in the 70s and high school in the 80s probably remember how freaking scary the N-bomb was on the nightly news and the propaganda media we consumed, to teenagers, anyway. No wonder we drank and smoked and fucked so much. :drunk:
Tru dat. I'm just talking about how the cold war and neutron bombs messed with young kids' minds.
-
- Posts: 36399
- Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2016 3:22 am
Re: HH 59 : The Destroyer of Worlds
Oh indeed, going to bed wondering if the ICBM's were in the air, just by some sort of clusterfuck beyond the control of politicians, I remember it well, and in fact, it came damn close to that, that fear was not irrational at all. 3 June 1980 > 28 October 1962Fife wrote:Smitty-48 wrote:Well, for those of us at the sharp end, it sounded like a plan, because we felt like there would be a nuclear war eventually, just by misapprension, miscalculation, or mistake, so better to go to the N-bombs, because it was just a matter of time, and at least with the N-bombs, the sun would come up the next day; even if you had killed a billion people, there was still a future civilization after an N-bomb war, whereas with an H-bomb war, not so much.Fife wrote:Those of us old enough to have been in middle school in the 70s and high school in the 80s probably remember how freaking scary the N-bomb was on the nightly news and the propaganda media we consumed, to teenagers, anyway. No wonder we drank and smoked and fucked so much. :drunk:
Tru dat. I'm just talking about how the cold war and neutron bombs messed with young kids' minds.
Nec Aspera Terrent