US tests 'most dangerous nuclear weapon ever produced'

User avatar
Speaker to Animals
Posts: 38685
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2016 5:59 pm

Re: US tests 'most dangerous nuclear weapon ever produced'

Post by Speaker to Animals » Wed Aug 30, 2017 12:00 pm

Smitty-48 wrote:Well if you pre-deploy to orbit, best start digging your bomb shelters then, as that will incite an ASAT war, which will bleed rapidly towards the event horizon of counterforce, where, again, best have them SSBN's up in the saddle and bombers at failsafe, if you're going to take it there.

I would just do it in secret. We do need to study the dangers of melting ice caps.

User avatar
SuburbanFarmer
Posts: 25287
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2016 6:50 am
Location: Ohio

Re: US tests 'most dangerous nuclear weapon ever produced'

Post by SuburbanFarmer » Wed Aug 30, 2017 12:01 pm

Image
SJWs are a natural consequence of corporatism.

Formerly GrumpyCatFace

https://youtu.be/CYbT8-rSqo0

Smitty-48
Posts: 36399
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2016 3:22 am

Re: US tests 'most dangerous nuclear weapon ever produced'

Post by Smitty-48 » Wed Aug 30, 2017 12:01 pm

Speaker to Animals wrote:
Smitty-48 wrote:Well if you pre-deploy to orbit, best start digging your bomb shelters then, as that will incite an ASAT war, which will bleed rapidly towards the event horizon of counterforce, where, again, best have them SSBN's up in the saddle and bombers at failsafe, if you're going to take it there.
I would just do it in secret. We do need to study the dangers of melting ice caps.
Well except there will always be a John Walker or Eddie Snowden to out you, so can't rely on keeping a secret like that in America.

Some idealistic Millenial Cultural Marxist or embittered Lolberg would rat you out to the SVR before you ever got close to a launch window.
Nec Aspera Terrent

User avatar
Speaker to Animals
Posts: 38685
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2016 5:59 pm

Re: US tests 'most dangerous nuclear weapon ever produced'

Post by Speaker to Animals » Wed Aug 30, 2017 12:25 pm

Smitty-48 wrote:
Speaker to Animals wrote:
Smitty-48 wrote:Well if you pre-deploy to orbit, best start digging your bomb shelters then, as that will incite an ASAT war, which will bleed rapidly towards the event horizon of counterforce, where, again, best have them SSBN's up in the saddle and bombers at failsafe, if you're going to take it there.
I would just do it in secret. We do need to study the dangers of melting ice caps.
Well except there will always be a John Walker or Eddie Snowden to out you, so can't rely on keeping a secret like that in America.

Some idealistic Millenial Cultural Marxist or embittered Lolberg would rat you out to the SVR before you ever got close to a launch window.


Fake news. Polonium tea. RIP.

Smitty-48
Posts: 36399
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2016 3:22 am

Re: US tests 'most dangerous nuclear weapon ever produced'

Post by Smitty-48 » Wed Aug 30, 2017 12:34 pm

Speaker to Animals wrote:
Smitty-48 wrote:
Speaker to Animals wrote:
I would just do it in secret. We do need to study the dangers of melting ice caps.
Well except there will always be a John Walker or Eddie Snowden to out you, so can't rely on keeping a secret like that in America.

Some idealistic Millenial Cultural Marxist or embittered Lolberg would rat you out to the SVR before you ever got close to a launch window.
Fake news. Polonium tea. RIP.
Wot, with Millenials and Lolbergs? They're ratting you out all over the place, you'd have to liquidate them all, it's Gen Y America naow, there's a traitor to the empire under every rock and around every tree, it's the treason generation, they make the hippies in the 1960s look like J. Edgar Hoover & Co.
Nec Aspera Terrent

User avatar
Speaker to Animals
Posts: 38685
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2016 5:59 pm

Re: US tests 'most dangerous nuclear weapon ever produced'

Post by Speaker to Animals » Wed Aug 30, 2017 12:35 pm

I guess we'll need a lot of surplus polonium. Ramp up the nuclear warhead production. Oh wait. We'd have to do that anyway to build Space Shield. Win-win.

User avatar
Hanarchy Montanarchy
Posts: 5991
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2016 1:54 am

Re: US tests 'most dangerous nuclear weapon ever produced'

Post by Hanarchy Montanarchy » Wed Aug 30, 2017 3:58 pm

Was anyone else super disappointed when they found out the definition of 'gravity bomb.'

It is a very apocalyptic name for something that is very mundane.
HAIL!

Her needs America so they won't just take his shit away like in some pussy non gun totting countries can happen.
-Hwen

User avatar
Speaker to Animals
Posts: 38685
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2016 5:59 pm

Re: US tests 'most dangerous nuclear weapon ever produced'

Post by Speaker to Animals » Wed Aug 30, 2017 4:00 pm

Hanarchy Montanarchy wrote:Was anyone else super disappointed when they found out the definition of 'gravity bomb.'

It is a very apocalyptic name for something that is very mundane.

It's plenty apocalyptic when you are the guy trying to huff it on his bike across the bridge when you know one is coming.

Smitty-48
Posts: 36399
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2016 3:22 am

Re: US tests 'most dangerous nuclear weapon ever produced'

Post by Smitty-48 » Wed Aug 30, 2017 4:09 pm

Hanarchy Montanarchy wrote:Was anyone else super disappointed when they found out the definition of 'gravity bomb.'

It is a very apocalyptic name for something that is very mundane.
Crank the dial-a-yield up on the FUFO B61-7 all the way to 340 kilotons; prolly gonna seem a little more supernova like then.

Around 50 million degrees F, so more than three times hotter than the core of the gravity bomb at the center of the Solar system.
Nec Aspera Terrent

User avatar
Speaker to Animals
Posts: 38685
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2016 5:59 pm

Re: US tests 'most dangerous nuclear weapon ever produced'

Post by Speaker to Animals » Wed Aug 30, 2017 4:27 pm

GrumpyCatFace wrote:Image

That's what I said. You can sort of get into an elliptical orbit if you are traveling at about 24,000 km/h. What you just gave shows the lowest circular orbital velocity at around 27,000 km/h.

I very much doubt an ICBM at apogee is going much faster than 20,000 km/h since it would risk just going into orbit.

So if you have a platform in orbit, it's already going to be upwards of 30,000 km/h. But that sort of makes the problem easier as long as you have warning of a launch and the platform is in range of the ICBM's projected apogee.

The bigger problem is that these ICBMs are mostly flying across the arctic and it's not like you can just park up there like you can near the equator. You'd need lots of platforms distributed in various polar orbits so that one or two of them are always covering the polar region.