Originally Posted by srvy:
A mushroom cloud can rise to 30,000 feet in the high desert you can see hundred of miles to a mountain range. Exaggerate much ?
no. They shouldn’t have been exploding nuclear bombs near population centers. They shouldn’t have lied to its citizens about the risks. It wasn’t okay then, it’s not okay to minimize the unneccesary risks to civilians. We did that. Own it, learn and move on. [Reply]
I watched a video of the US setting off a nuke and having the soldiers walk into the detonation site to study how we will fight a ground war in the nuclear environment.
Bikini Atoll, Marshall Islands, etc. The US has demonstrated it's share of stupidity. [Reply]
Originally Posted by BigRedChief:
no. They shouldn’t have been exploding nuclear bombs near population centers. They shouldn’t have lied to its citizens about the risks. It wasn’t okay then, it’s not okay to minimize the unneccesary risks to civilians. We did that. Own it, learn and move on.
what do you consider close to a population center? [Reply]
Originally Posted by notorious:
I watched a video of the US setting off a nuke and having the soldiers walk into the detonation site to study how we will fight a ground war in the nuclear environment.
Bikini Atoll, Marshall Islands, etc. The US has demonstrated it's share of stupidity.
It was probably not the brightest thing to do but my understanding is the aftermath of an air burst is less extreme than something like a reactor blowing on the ground. In terms of radiation, anyway. Still stupid, though. [Reply]
Originally Posted by ShiftyEyedWaterboy:
It was probably not the brightest thing to do but my understanding is the aftermath of an air burst is less extreme than something like a reactor blowing on the ground. In terms of radiation, anyway. Still stupid, though.
Yeah. But that’s like saying the clap is better than aids. Technically you’re right, but it’s not worth fighting about. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Buehler445:
Yeah. But that’s like saying the clap is better than aids. Technically you’re right, but it’s not worth fighting about.
Yeah, I did some research and the immediate aftermath is still pretty bad. Especially the closer you get to the detonation center. I guess it's the long-term effects that are way less severe. My dad talked about visiting Hiroshima in the late 50s as a kid and you could hardly tell anything had happened. People had already rebuilt and moved back. [Reply]
Originally Posted by ShiftyEyedWaterboy:
Yeah, I did some research and the immediate aftermath is still pretty bad. Especially the closer you get to the detonation center. I guess it's the long-term effects that are way less severe. My dad talked about visiting Hiroshima in the late 50s as a kid and you could hardly tell anything had happened. People had already rebuilt and moved back.
IIRC, that was an A bomb which is a little different than what is used today? [Reply]
Originally Posted by O.city:
IIRC, that was an A bomb which is a little different than what is used today?
Fission bomb vs. Hydrogen bomb.
The fission in a hydrogen bomb exists to set off fusion and releases exponentially more energy.
If you think of the WWII bombs as being nothing more than the triggering device for modern thermonuclear bombs, you're not too far off.
When the Russians nerfed Tsar Bomba and saw the carnage it wrought, they realized that we're pretty much on the verge of genuine world-enders and stopped building them up. And again - they dialed Tsar Bomba down. The fact that they set that thing off expecting a 50 megaton blast (and got more than that) is just unbelievable. [Reply]
Originally Posted by DJ's left nut:
Fission bomb vs. Hydrogen bomb.
The fission in a hydrogen bomb exists to set off fusion and releases exponentially more energy.
If you think of the WWII bombs as being nothing more than the triggering device for modern thermonuclear bombs, you're not too far off.
When the Russians nerfed Tsar Bomba and saw the carnage it wrought, they realized that we're pretty much on the verge of genuine world-enders and stopped building them up. And again - they dialed Tsar Bomba down. The fact that they set that thing off expecting a 50 megaton blast (and got more than that) is just unbelievable.
Happened with most of the American thermonuclear tests as well. Theoretical yields often severely underestimated actual yields. [Reply]
The book talks about how bad Soviet quality control is, and how they had to disassemble and rebuild every component to spec on site to make sure it would work.
It's amazing Soviet communism lasted as long as it did. It's all one big sham. [Reply]
Originally Posted by InChiefsHell:
I saw that when I was a kid...didn't really understand it. I'd like to see it again...
What was remarkable was it was released two weeks before the Three Mile Island disaster in PA. The movie was huge hit after that. I have it on my DVR recorded from Turner Classic on March 21. I'm sure it will come up again this year since the Chernobyl series. [Reply]