It's the end of the world as we know it and I'm feeling fine

Kashluk · Post by **Kashluk** » Fri Oct 13, 2006 2:30 pm

POOPERSCOOPER wrote:Isn't one of our strongest bombs around 85 MT?

Tsar Bomba (50 megaton test launch, theoretical power of 100 megatons) is the biggest and toughest nuclear weapon to date... But too cumbersome to be efficiently used. American ICBM's can carry up to 10 warheads with a maximum of 600 kiloton load per warhead, I think. So that'd sum up to a total of 60 megatons, right? ICBM's are a lot better since there's almost no way to stop them, they're very fast, accurate, long-ranged and versatile.

0.02 $

jetbaby · Post by **jetbaby** » Fri Oct 13, 2006 4:48 pm

Blargh wrote:
jetbaby wrote:power to
No, you don't. You're far too busy maintaining your arsenal, ever updating it and exporting democracy. Amongst other things. The father to an unnecessary clot of well adjusted children.

Which is exactly what I'm talking about. Too busy feeding starving Africans and policing the whole world.

Personally I think we should kill all swell guy and nuke all scandanavians, but that's just me. And Kashluk is clearly a spy because he's too integral to DAC to lose when America gets around to invading wherever you live.

PaladinHeart · Post by **PaladinHeart** » Fri Oct 13, 2006 4:54 pm

It would be funny if the N Korea scientists were showing off a model to their superiors that they thought was safe, and they all died shortly thereafter of radiation poisoning.

Locke · Post by **Locke** » Fri Oct 13, 2006 8:26 pm

jetbaby wrote:policing the whole world.

poor superman activists. performing feats no one asks for.

Personally I think we should kill all flower and nuke all scandanavians, but that's just me.

personally I think you're one shitting homunculus

Franz Schubert · Post by **Franz Schubert** » Sat Oct 14, 2006 1:45 am

Blargh wrote:delightfully cumbersome fifty megaton and upward radioactive phalluses

Don't you mean phalli?

Blargh · Post by **Blargh** » Sat Oct 14, 2006 4:14 am

For what resembles obvious reasoning, I meant potted (though not flowering) plants. Oh well.

Redeye · Post by **Redeye** » Sat Oct 14, 2006 5:33 am

POOPERSCOOPER wrote:Isn't one of our strongest bombs around 85 MT?

9MT for Titan II
25MT biggest ever deployed by US

Really, the issue isn't size/MTs- its the ability to deliver.

I seriously doubt the Gook-Dong can carry the undoubtedly huge and clunky bombs the N.Koreans can make.

List of US nukes.

More on US nukes

Still more on US nukes

North Korea Special Weapons

I want to see some video like this from North Korea.

vx trauma · Post by **vx trauma** » Sat Oct 14, 2006 1:19 pm

good kill. that 30 mm vs flesh and civilian vehicles is a classic. wish it would be in a better resolution and in technicolor. then again, wars could end prematurely as in vietnam due to evil peacemongers. those killjoys. i hate them. i really hate them.

Scorpion · Post by **Scorpion** » Sat Oct 14, 2006 3:23 pm

Yeah, biggest nuke = 50MT = 3 shockwaves around the world...

But, way too huge.

http://www.atomicforum.org

Redeye · Post by **Redeye** » Sat Oct 14, 2006 10:01 pm

vx trauma wrote:good kill. that 30 mm vs flesh and civilian vehicles is a classic. wish it would be in a better resolution and in technicolor. then again, wars could end prematurely as in vietnam due to evil peacemongers. those killjoys. i hate them. i really hate them.

I like the way the FLIR picks up the warm body chunks.

vx trauma · Post by **vx trauma** » Sun Oct 15, 2006 12:12 am

Ja! body chunks is what makes splatter or ze real thing supreme over mere slash and gore. juicy bits for scavengers to doggibag back to the nest for the hungry little ones. or why not arange the leftovers for a proper war hater/fan picture.

Redeye · Post by **Redeye** » Sun Oct 15, 2006 12:35 am

Kashluk wrote:
POOPERSCOOPER wrote:Isn't one of our strongest bombs around 85 MT?
Tsar Bomba (50 megaton test launch, theoretical power of 100 megatons) is the biggest and toughest nuclear weapon to date... But too cumbersome to be efficiently used. American ICBM's can carry up to 10 warheads with a maximum of 600 kiloton load per warhead, I think. So that'd sum up to a total of 60 megatons, right? ICBM's are a lot better since there's almost no way to stop them, they're very fast, accurate, long-ranged and versatile.

0.02 $

10X600kt = 6MT

The real warheads were 300kt, not 600. So only 3MT per MX.

Actually, the MX (LGM-118 "Peacekeeper" lol) was able to carry 12 warheads, but the number was reduced for some treaty crap.

St. Toxic · Post by **St. Toxic** » Sun Oct 15, 2006 1:04 am

Anything under 50 mt is just boring. Is there a way to get something along the lines of Tsar Bomba rocket propelled or in other ways effective in attacks? I wouldn't mind seeing a few 100 mt's going off in the future. Prefferably all over the place. :falloutshelter:

Kashluk · Post by **Kashluk** » Sun Oct 15, 2006 9:55 am

Yeah, I rock at math. Indeed, only 6 Mt.

Redeye · Post by **Redeye** » Sun Oct 15, 2006 1:24 pm

St. Toxic wrote:Anything under 50 mt is just boring. Is there a way to get something along the lines of Tsar Bomba rocket propelled or in other ways effective in attacks? I wouldn't mind seeing a few 100 mt's going off in the future. Prefferably all over the place. :falloutshelter:

With nanomanufacturing it may be possible to dispense with uranium and plutonium entirely.

Just supersmall spiderweblike strands of mass produced shaped charges that roll up like DNA.
Grow that shit so several threads bond to each other at opposing angles and seal hydrogen/isotopes in between.

Mass-Produced Mass Destruction!

vx trauma · Post by **vx trauma** » Sun Oct 15, 2006 2:59 pm

mad doctor airlifted out of crumbling nazi regime teaches the newspeak: howto destroy ze biosphere - forced agoraphobia in practise. Ja. :drop_ze_bomb_exterminate_them_all: