Command and Conquer: Renegade Official Forums: Heated Discussions and Debates

Home » General Discussions » Heated Discussions and Debates » U.S. Building new nukes

Show: Today's Messages :: Polls :: Message Navigator

U.S. Building new nukes [message #137620]

Fri, 11 February 2005 01:41

sloppyme
Messages: 2
Registered: February 2005
Location: Puget Sound area

Karma:

Recruit

Blazer

That's nice if it explodes when its < 1000 feet off the ground, but what happens when there is a high altitude explosion and there is a load of plutonium etc aboard? It's the reason that we bury nuclear waste instead of shooting it into space...it's not worth the risk.

My knowledge of nukes is only what I learned from pushing them around while serving on subs. The latest nukes have been primarily neutron types that leave little radiactive debrie and most buildings would still be intact after they detonate overhead. They don't have quite the blast effect of earlier bombs. However, the huge kill radius is a result of being toasted to a crisp or having too many cells in your body being ruptured from the overload of neutrons passing through. The farther away you are or how shielded you are determins your survivability. Nuetrons particles can really penatrate. Infact, you have neutrons particles (& gamma) passing through your body whenever you expose yourself to the sun. If you spend too much time in high altitude aircraft, you are exposed to a lot more of them.

These weapons are harder to maintain because of a certain gas needed (I'm still not supposed to disclose what type but you can find it easy enough with a little research) to make them effective. These nukes have a shorter life span because this gas dissapates or changes chemically over time. The actual package of explosives & radioactive materials is about the size of a basketball. There is more conventional explosive material then radioactive material. The conventional explosive (like c-4) make up most of the container (sphere) that surrounds the plutonium with the special gas in the center. It is the even detonation of the surrounding c-4 like explosive to such perfection that causes the radioactive material to be pushed to the exact center to get the proper yeild of the chain reaction that happens in an instant.

If this basketball sized core is somehow ripped out of a missle or whatever, it has lost all the timing triggers and electronics that detonate the inner core. So, if a missle should break apart in the sky, you have more to worry about chunks of plastic explosives landing on you then exposure to rad materials. Yes, the radioactive materials can harm you if you inhale or ingest them but they can be washed off so you can survive provided you do so in a timely manner.

Should core detonate because of re-entry friction or impact it would, at worst, only result in a partial yeild. This, as it was told to me, would be quite difficult to achieve since any detonation without the proper or perfect timing sequence will most likely result of sending the radioactive elements & gas in different directions without any nuclear yeild at all. The gas would dissapate and the chunks of rad material could be cleaned up and disposed of.

The burial of nuke waste is mainly to isolate and preserve the containers it is in. You have to remember that some of this stuff has a half life over 238 years. Some materials could be used to make the dirty type bombs so they need to be secure from theft. There may be an event of some sort that would compromise these containers on the surface; deep underground storage reduces the risk of breaching containment while providing greater security.

To my ex wife: The check is in the mail.
To my kids: Hold your horses, I'll be off my computer and start dinner in just a couple minutes.
To my landlord: The lawn will get mowed as soon as I can find where I put the mower.
To my girlfriend: Please rub my shoulders, I'm having muscle cramps because this brutal game has lasted 6 hours so far and neither side has destroyed a building yet.

Report message to a moderator

[Message index]

		U.S. Building new nukes By: Blazer on Mon, 07 February 2005 00:34
		U.S. Building new nukes By: Sir Phoenixx on Mon, 07 February 2005 08:14
		U.S. Building new nukes By: DaveGMM on Mon, 07 February 2005 10:05
		U.S. Building new nukes By: cheesesoda on Mon, 07 February 2005 12:23
		U.S. Building new nukes By: Sir Phoenixx on Mon, 07 February 2005 12:53
		U.S. Building new nukes By: JPNOD on Mon, 07 February 2005 13:43
		U.S. Building new nukes By: cheesesoda on Mon, 07 February 2005 13:45
		U.S. Building new nukes By: SuperFlyingEngi on Mon, 07 February 2005 14:29
		U.S. Building new nukes By: Jecht on Mon, 07 February 2005 15:45
		U.S. Building new nukes By: SuperFlyingEngi on Mon, 07 February 2005 17:12
		U.S. Building new nukes By: cheesesoda on Mon, 07 February 2005 17:19
		U.S. Building new nukes By: Sir Phoenixx on Mon, 07 February 2005 17:29
		U.S. Building new nukes By: PointlessAmbler on Mon, 07 February 2005 21:17
		U.S. Building new nukes By: Majiin Vegeta on Mon, 07 February 2005 21:30
		U.S. Building new nukes By: cheesesoda on Mon, 07 February 2005 21:35
		U.S. Building new nukes By: Doitle on Mon, 07 February 2005 21:55
		U.S. Building new nukes By: IRON FART on Mon, 07 February 2005 22:23
		U.S. Building new nukes By: Blazer on Tue, 08 February 2005 03:03
		U.S. Building new nukes By: Doitle on Tue, 08 February 2005 06:43
		U.S. Building new nukes By: Blazer on Tue, 08 February 2005 11:19
		U.S. Building new nukes By: cheesesoda on Tue, 08 February 2005 11:29
		U.S. Building new nukes By: Blazer on Tue, 08 February 2005 12:48
		U.S. Building new nukes By: cheesesoda on Tue, 08 February 2005 12:51
		U.S. Building new nukes By: DaveGMM on Tue, 08 February 2005 15:09
		U.S. Building new nukes By: cheesesoda on Tue, 08 February 2005 15:22
		U.S. Building new nukes By: IRON FART on Tue, 08 February 2005 16:25
		U.S. Building new nukes By: cheesesoda on Tue, 08 February 2005 16:27
		U.S. Building new nukes By: Blazer on Tue, 08 February 2005 18:35
		U.S. Building new nukes By: Doitle on Tue, 08 February 2005 19:09
		U.S. Building new nukes By: Blazer on Tue, 08 February 2005 19:42
		U.S. Building new nukes By: Doitle on Tue, 08 February 2005 20:56
		U.S. Building new nukes By: sloppyme on Fri, 11 February 2005 01:03
		U.S. Building new nukes By: sloppyme on Fri, 11 February 2005 01:41
		U.S. Building new nukes By: Sir Phoenixx on Fri, 11 February 2005 07:21
		U.S. Building new nukes By: Doitle on Fri, 11 February 2005 18:12
		U.S. Building new nukes By: warranto on Fri, 11 February 2005 19:24
		U.S. Building new nukes By: Doitle on Fri, 11 February 2005 20:20
		U.S. Building new nukes By: Blazer on Fri, 11 February 2005 23:15
		U.S. Building new nukes By: warranto on Sat, 12 February 2005 12:13
		U.S. Building new nukes By: Jaspah on Sat, 12 February 2005 13:04
		U.S. Building new nukes By: cheesesoda on Sat, 12 February 2005 13:21
		U.S. Building new nukes By: Doitle on Sat, 12 February 2005 23:14
		U.S. Building new nukes By: Blazer on Sun, 13 February 2005 01:17
		U.S. Building new nukes By: Sir Phoenixx on Sun, 13 February 2005 06:41
		U.S. Building new nukes By: Doitle on Sun, 13 February 2005 10:46
		U.S. Building new nukes By: warranto on Sun, 13 February 2005 10:55
		U.S. Building new nukes By: Doitle on Sun, 13 February 2005 19:14
		U.S. Building new nukes By: SuperFlyingEngi on Sun, 13 February 2005 19:17
		U.S. Building new nukes By: Doitle on Sun, 13 February 2005 20:21
		U.S. Building new nukes By: warranto on Sun, 13 February 2005 20:29
		U.S. Building new nukes By: Doitle on Sun, 13 February 2005 20:39
		U.S. Building new nukes By: Jecht on Sun, 13 February 2005 21:41

Previous Topic:	Ring of Evil
Next Topic:	"Here's to the heroes"

Goto Forum:

-=] Back to Top [=-

[ Syndicate this forum (XML) ] [

] [

]

Current Time: Tue Jul 22 06:20:42 MST 2025

Total time taken to generate the page: 0.01838 seconds