EDAboard.com | EDAboard.de | EDAboard.co.uk | WTWH Media

I vote "crazy"

Ask a question - edaboard.com

elektroda.net NewsGroups Forum Index - Electronics Design - I vote "crazy"

Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next


Guest

Fri Feb 01, 2019 6:45 pm   



On Friday, February 1, 2019 at 12:16:41 AM UTC-5, Jon Elson wrote:
Quote:
bitrex wrote:



Incidentally the only surefire way to destroy well-hardened ICBM silos
is to detonate ground bursts of say 100 kiloton weapons in a diamond or
star pattern, at a range of maybe 500 yards from the silo, fracture the
rock, and implode/crush the silo inwards from all sides at the pinch point
You don't actually have to demolish the missile to put it "effectively" out
of action. You just have to shake it pretty well. The angular alignment of
these things have to be INSANELY accurate to hit a target 7000 miles away.
I actually have no idea how they survey these things in to the required
accuracy. Our Minuteman missiles have windows in the guidance system, and
they install something on the walls of the silo, something like a mirror and
a transit. They sight through the guidance platform to the mirror and back
and use that to align the guidance platform. How they set up the mirror and
transit base to the required accuracy is the mystery. Some kind of super
surveying technique.

So, anyway, if a single nuclear explosion was within a few thousand feet of
a silo, the missile would rock and get out of alignment. Then, you might be
able to still launch and hit the general target region, but I'd assume your
aim would be off by miles.

Jon


LOL- it's a missile not a canon.


Guest

Fri Feb 01, 2019 6:45 pm   



On Friday, February 1, 2019 at 11:56:38 AM UTC-5, bitrex wrote:
Quote:
On 02/01/2019 11:44 AM, bloggs.fredbloggs.fred_at_gmail.com wrote:
On Friday, February 1, 2019 at 5:35:41 AM UTC-5, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Friday, February 1, 2019 at 4:16:41 PM UTC+11, Jon Elson wrote:
bitrex wrote:

Incidentally the only surefire way to destroy well-hardened ICBM silos
is to detonate ground bursts of say 100 kiloton weapons in a diamond or
star pattern, at a range of maybe 500 yards from the silo, fracture the
rock, and implode/crush the silo inwards from all sides at the pinch point
You don't actually have to demolish the missile to put it "effectively" out
of action. You just have to shake it pretty well. The angular alignment of
these things have to be INSANELY accurate to hit a target 7000 miles away.

They would be, if they couldn't do mid-course corrections.

I've not idea whether they can or not, but they do spend a while outside the atmosphere, could latch onto specific stars to work out which way they were going pretty accurately, and could use GPS to work out where they were, and it wouldn't take much in the way of a gimballed thruster to improve the impact point.

I actually have no idea how they survey these things in to the required
accuracy. Our Minuteman missiles have windows in the guidance system, and
they install something on the walls of the silo, something like a mirror and
a transit. They sight through the guidance platform to the mirror and back
and use that to align the guidance platform. How they set up the mirror and
transit base to the required accuracy is the mystery. Some kind of super
surveying technique.

So, anyway, if a single nuclear explosion was within a few thousand feet of
a silo, the missile would rock and get out of alignment. Then, you might be
able to still launch and hit the general target region, but I'd assume your
aim would be off by miles.

This might not be a valid assumption.

It is. The entire U.S. missile field will be wiped out. The only way to save them is to launch them prior to arrival of the incoming.

CEP is 200m for these behemoths:

http://www.military-today.com/missiles/ss18_satan.htm


--
Bill Sloman, Sydney


200m should be fine for physical destruction of the silo if that counts
as "rocked out of alignment" I would say so.


Silo will become part of the crater. These will be altitude bursts. The publicized damage of a 1MT detonated at 10,000 feet above the U.S. Capitol, is to leave a 400 ft deep crater and burn everything inside the beltway charcoal black. And they'll have a lot more than just one coming into that prize..

John Larkin
Guest

Fri Feb 01, 2019 6:45 pm   



On Thu, 31 Jan 2019 12:05:37 -0800 (PST),
bloggs.fredbloggs.fred_at_gmail.com wrote:

Quote:
On Thursday, January 31, 2019 at 2:39:24 PM UTC-5, John Robertson wrote:
On 2019/01/31 11:19 a.m., John Larkin wrote:


https://www.scmp.com/news/china/science/article/2183466/chinas-plan-use-nuclear-bomb-detonator-release-shale-gas




Not new news, the USA contemplated that in the late 50s:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Oilsand (Alberta, Canada!)

https://aoghs.org/technology/project-gasbuggy/

No one ever learns...

John :-#(#

Surprised that lunatic Teller wasn't involved ...


I met him once, in the security shack at LLNL. He was very old and got
VIP treatment; I had to wait to get checked in. They treated him like
God.


--

John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc

lunatic fringe electronics


Guest

Fri Feb 01, 2019 6:45 pm   



On Thursday, January 31, 2019 at 2:47:39 PM UTC-5, Jon Elson wrote:
Quote:
On Thu, 31 Jan 2019 11:39:14 -0800, John Robertson wrote:

On 2019/01/31 11:19 a.m., John Larkin wrote:


https://www.scmp.com/news/china/science/article/2183466/chinas-plan-
use-nuclear-bomb-detonator-release-shale-gas




Not new news, the USA contemplated that in the late 50s:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Oilsand (Alberta, Canada!)

https://aoghs.org/technology/project-gasbuggy/

No one ever learns...
We didn't just "contemplate" it, we actually DID a test. It worked, too,
except for the "little" problem that the gas was radioactive! Want some
nice radioactive gas PIPED inside your house? No thanks!

Jon


It is a fact radioactive natural gas messes up all the electronic control of the distribution system, so you definitely don't need that!


Guest

Fri Feb 01, 2019 6:45 pm   



On Friday, February 1, 2019 at 12:24:14 PM UTC-5, bitrex wrote:
Quote:
On 02/01/2019 12:07 PM, bloggs.fredbloggs.fred_at_gmail.com wrote:

It is. The entire U.S. missile field will be wiped out. The only way to save them is to launch them prior to arrival of the incoming.

CEP is 200m for these behemoths:

http://www.military-today.com/missiles/ss18_satan.htm


--
Bill Sloman, Sydney


200m should be fine for physical destruction of the silo if that counts
as "rocked out of alignment" I would say so.

Silo will become part of the crater. These will be altitude bursts. The publicized damage of a 1MT detonated at 10,000 feet above the U.S. Capitol, is to leave a 400 ft deep crater and burn everything inside the beltway charcoal black. And they'll have a lot more than just one coming into that prize.


A 1MT warheaded detonated on the ground doesn't leave a 400 foot deep
crater, much less 10,000 feet in the air


Probably just media sensationalism then... we can relax now that we know the truth.

Joe Chisolm
Guest

Fri Feb 01, 2019 7:45 pm   



On Fri, 01 Feb 2019 10:58:23 -0500, Phil Hobbs wrote:

Quote:
On 1/31/19 2:47 PM, Jon Elson wrote:
On Thu, 31 Jan 2019 11:39:14 -0800, John Robertson wrote:

On 2019/01/31 11:19 a.m., John Larkin wrote:


https://www.scmp.com/news/china/science/article/2183466/chinas-plan-
use-nuclear-bomb-detonator-release-shale-gas




Not new news, the USA contemplated that in the late 50s:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Oilsand (Alberta, Canada!)

https://aoghs.org/technology/project-gasbuggy/

No one ever learns...
We didn't just "contemplate" it, we actually DID a test. It worked,
too,
except for the "little" problem that the gas was radioactive! Want
some nice radioactive gas PIPED inside your house? No thanks!

Jon


I find it hard to believe that a fission bomb set off underground would
make natural gas dangerously radioactive.

(a) Essentially all the direct radiation from the blast would be
shielded out by a few metres' of rock.

(b) You don't put the well into the blast cavity

(c) Fission doesn't produce a lot of radioactive light elements.

I'd be more worried about radon in the basement.


Fusion bombs are another matter.

Cheers

Phil Hobbs


My dad worked for El Paso Natural Gas (EPNG) during that time
(he worked for EPNG from just after he got home from the war
until he retired in 1984). There were EPNG news letters about
the project, it was the talk of the company. If I remember
correctly the idea was to fracture the rock and create a
chimney from the collapse and drill into the chimney. The
radiation would be "within safe levels" but the problem
was what happens when you have a 100s of wells feeding into a
main line. The result vs cost was not there either. Even
with the DOD giving you a device it was still too
expensive.

--
Chisolm
Republic of Texas

bitrex
Guest

Fri Feb 01, 2019 8:45 pm   



On 02/01/2019 12:37 PM, bloggs.fredbloggs.fred_at_gmail.com wrote:
Quote:
On Friday, February 1, 2019 at 12:24:14 PM UTC-5, bitrex wrote:
On 02/01/2019 12:07 PM, bloggs.fredbloggs.fred_at_gmail.com wrote:

It is. The entire U.S. missile field will be wiped out. The only way to save them is to launch them prior to arrival of the incoming.

CEP is 200m for these behemoths:

http://www.military-today.com/missiles/ss18_satan.htm


--
Bill Sloman, Sydney


200m should be fine for physical destruction of the silo if that counts
as "rocked out of alignment" I would say so.

Silo will become part of the crater. These will be altitude bursts. The publicized damage of a 1MT detonated at 10,000 feet above the U.S. Capitol, is to leave a 400 ft deep crater and burn everything inside the beltway charcoal black. And they'll have a lot more than just one coming into that prize.


A 1MT warheaded detonated on the ground doesn't leave a 400 foot deep
crater, much less 10,000 feet in the air

Probably just media sensationalism then... we can relax now that we know the truth.



The snark in your reply is fairly well-constructed, and noted, but
generally speaking hardened targets like silos, tanks, bunkers etc. are
pretty resistant to the effects of air blasts even quite large and close
ones

Jasen Betts
Guest

Fri Feb 01, 2019 9:45 pm   



On 2019-02-01, Martin Brown <'''newspam'''@nezumi.demon.co.uk> wrote:
Quote:
On 01/02/2019 04:54, Jasen Betts wrote:
On 2019-02-01, John Larkin <jjlarkin_at_highland_snip_technology.com> wrote:
On Thu, 31 Jan 2019 20:39:46 +0000, Martin Brown
'''newspam'''@nezumi.demon.co.uk> wrote:

A nuke will fracture kilotons of rock for sure. A capacitor, not so
much.

If you think the exploding bridge wires were resonsible for the
compression of the plutonium pit you are mistaken.

The bridge wires were the detonators that started
the high explosive off the HE compresses the pit.

They're puttins surplus high explosive down the hole.
probably recycled from some de-commsioned nukes,

That is my guess too. They are using nuclear warhead implosion
technology, precision detonators and shaped charge high explosives to
generate the right sort of shockwaves. It might be possible but it will
certainly be much more inclined to generate earthquakes than hydraulics.


That was my original thought, but the article actually says the're just
using exploding wires (but not bomb parts, or theatrical thunder:
much larger wires)

--
When I tried casting out nines I made a hash of it.


Guest

Fri Feb 01, 2019 10:45 pm   



On Friday, February 1, 2019 at 2:02:54 PM UTC-5, bitrex wrote:
Quote:
On 02/01/2019 12:37 PM, bloggs.fredbloggs.fred_at_gmail.com wrote:
On Friday, February 1, 2019 at 12:24:14 PM UTC-5, bitrex wrote:
On 02/01/2019 12:07 PM, bloggs.fredbloggs.fred_at_gmail.com wrote:

It is. The entire U.S. missile field will be wiped out. The only way to save them is to launch them prior to arrival of the incoming.

CEP is 200m for these behemoths:

http://www.military-today.com/missiles/ss18_satan.htm


--
Bill Sloman, Sydney


200m should be fine for physical destruction of the silo if that counts
as "rocked out of alignment" I would say so.

Silo will become part of the crater. These will be altitude bursts. The publicized damage of a 1MT detonated at 10,000 feet above the U.S. Capitol, is to leave a 400 ft deep crater and burn everything inside the beltway charcoal black. And they'll have a lot more than just one coming into that prize.


A 1MT warheaded detonated on the ground doesn't leave a 400 foot deep
crater, much less 10,000 feet in the air

Probably just media sensationalism then... we can relax now that we know the truth.



The snark in your reply is fairly well-constructed, and noted, but
generally speaking hardened targets like silos, tanks, bunkers etc. are
pretty resistant to the effects of air blasts even quite large and close
ones


As far as people go, those shoulders must be equipped with blast valves to protect against the overpressure of the blast wave. It doesn't take much of an overpressure, compared to those actually produced, to kill. Something like only 35psi is lethal, and near ground zero the overpressure is easily 150psi. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blast_valve

bitrex
Guest

Sat Feb 02, 2019 12:45 am   



On 02/01/2019 03:57 PM, bloggs.fredbloggs.fred_at_gmail.com wrote:
Quote:
On Friday, February 1, 2019 at 2:02:54 PM UTC-5, bitrex wrote:
On 02/01/2019 12:37 PM, bloggs.fredbloggs.fred_at_gmail.com wrote:
On Friday, February 1, 2019 at 12:24:14 PM UTC-5, bitrex wrote:
On 02/01/2019 12:07 PM, bloggs.fredbloggs.fred_at_gmail.com wrote:

It is. The entire U.S. missile field will be wiped out. The only way to save them is to launch them prior to arrival of the incoming.

CEP is 200m for these behemoths:

http://www.military-today.com/missiles/ss18_satan.htm


--
Bill Sloman, Sydney


200m should be fine for physical destruction of the silo if that counts
as "rocked out of alignment" I would say so.

Silo will become part of the crater. These will be altitude bursts. The publicized damage of a 1MT detonated at 10,000 feet above the U.S. Capitol, is to leave a 400 ft deep crater and burn everything inside the beltway charcoal black. And they'll have a lot more than just one coming into that prize.


A 1MT warheaded detonated on the ground doesn't leave a 400 foot deep
crater, much less 10,000 feet in the air

Probably just media sensationalism then... we can relax now that we know the truth.



The snark in your reply is fairly well-constructed, and noted, but
generally speaking hardened targets like silos, tanks, bunkers etc. are
pretty resistant to the effects of air blasts even quite large and close
ones

As far as people go, those shoulders must be equipped with blast valves to protect against the overpressure of the blast wave. It doesn't take much of an overpressure, compared to those actually produced, to kill. Something like only 35psi is lethal, and near ground zero the overpressure is easily 150psi. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blast_valve


The command/firing bunkers are deeper still and several miles from the
nearest actual silo but I agree that in the modern world most of the
"hardening" of the US silo-based forces is for show and would provide
zero defense whatsoever against a determined, massive strike against a
missile field.

the Soviet/now Russian ICBMs at least are quite accurate enough to land
right on top of every one of 'em less than 200 feet away probably and
and pop them all out of commission no problem at all if they're still
just sitting there when the warheads arrive.

Even Cheyenne Mountain facility isn't safe and hasn't been for a long
time now, part of why they don't use it for anything that important
anymore, all that hardening and giant blast doors are obsolete and just
make life difficult for day-to-day work. The Soviets/Russian have heavy
earth penetrators with large warheads that would just slam into the
mountain one behind another until the whole thing is rubble.

bitrex
Guest

Sat Feb 02, 2019 12:45 am   



On 02/01/2019 05:56 PM, bitrex wrote:

Quote:
The snark in your reply is fairly well-constructed, and noted, but
generally speaking hardened targets like silos, tanks, bunkers etc. are
pretty resistant to the effects of air blasts even quite large and close
ones

As far as people go, those shoulders must be equipped with blast
valves to protect against the overpressure of the blast wave. It
doesn't take much of an overpressure, compared to those actually
produced, to kill. Something like only 35psi is lethal, and near
ground zero the overpressure is easily 150psi.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blast_valve


The command/firing bunkers are deeper still and several miles from the
nearest actual silo but I agree that in the modern world most of the
"hardening" of the US silo-based forces is for show and would provide
zero defense whatsoever against a determined, massive strike against a
missile field.

the Soviet/now Russian ICBMs at least are quite accurate enough to land
right on top of every one of 'em less than 200 feet away probably and
and pop them all out of commission no problem at all if they're still
just sitting there when the warheads arrive.

Even Cheyenne Mountain facility isn't safe and hasn't been for a long
time now, part of why they don't use it for anything that important
anymore, all that hardening and giant blast doors are obsolete and just
make life difficult for day-to-day work. The Soviets/Russian have heavy
earth penetrators with large warheads that would just slam into the
mountain one behind another until the whole thing is rubble.


It's why US deterrence relies on a large SLBM fleet too because in a
first strike situation all that silo-based stuff is done.

dcaster@krl.org
Guest

Sat Feb 02, 2019 2:45 am   



On Friday, February 1, 2019 at 11:42:19 AM UTC-5, bitrex wrote:
Quote:
On 02/01/2019 05:35 AM, bill.sloman_at_ieee.org wrote:
On Friday, February 1, 2019 at 4:16:41 PM UTC+11, Jon Elson wrote:
bitrex wrote:

Incidentally the only surefire way to destroy well-hardened ICBM silos
is to detonate ground bursts of say 100 kiloton weapons in a diamond or
star pattern, at a range of maybe 500 yards from the silo, fracture the
rock, and implode/crush the silo inwards from all sides at the pinch point
You don't actually have to demolish the missile to put it "effectively" out
of action. You just have to shake it pretty well. The angular alignment of
these things have to be INSANELY accurate to hit a target 7000 miles away.

They would be, if they couldn't do mid-course corrections.



It's all inertial AFAIK on the Minuteman III and Trident II - no star
trackers, GPS corrections or receivers, none of that.


They are really accurate without mid-course corrections and even more accurate with mid-course correction.

Dan


Guest

Sat Feb 02, 2019 2:45 am   



On Saturday, February 2, 2019 at 4:09:16 AM UTC+11, John Larkin wrote:
Quote:
On Thu, 31 Jan 2019 12:05:37 -0800 (PST),
bloggs.fredbloggs.fred_at_gmail.com wrote:

On Thursday, January 31, 2019 at 2:39:24 PM UTC-5, John Robertson wrote:
On 2019/01/31 11:19 a.m., John Larkin wrote:


https://www.scmp.com/news/china/science/article/2183466/chinas-plan-use-nuclear-bomb-detonator-release-shale-gas




Not new news, the USA contemplated that in the late 50s:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Oilsand (Alberta, Canada!)

https://aoghs.org/technology/project-gasbuggy/

No one ever learns...

John :-#(#

Surprised that lunatic Teller wasn't involved ...

I met him once, in the security shack at LLNL. He was very old and got
VIP treatment; I had to wait to get checked in. They treated him like
God.


Unlike several of his even more right-wing physicist contemporaries, he recognised the dangers of anthropogenic global warming.

He is also the T in BET surface gas absorbtion theory, which gave me a bit of shock when I ran into it as a final year undergraduate in 1962. Not the place you'd expect to find the father of the hydrogen bomb.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BET_theory

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney


Guest

Sat Feb 02, 2019 2:45 am   



On Saturday, February 2, 2019 at 4:12:55 AM UTC+11, bloggs.fred...@gmail.com wrote:
Quote:
On Friday, February 1, 2019 at 12:09:16 PM UTC-5, John Larkin wrote:
On Thu, 31 Jan 2019 12:05:37 -0800 (PST),
bloggs.fredbloggs.fred_at_gmail.com wrote:

On Thursday, January 31, 2019 at 2:39:24 PM UTC-5, John Robertson wrote:
On 2019/01/31 11:19 a.m., John Larkin wrote:


https://www.scmp.com/news/china/science/article/2183466/chinas-plan-use-nuclear-bomb-detonator-release-shale-gas




Not new news, the USA contemplated that in the late 50s:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Oilsand (Alberta, Canada!)

https://aoghs.org/technology/project-gasbuggy/

No one ever learns...

John :-#(#

Surprised that lunatic Teller wasn't involved ...

I met him once, in the security shack at LLNL. He was very old and got
VIP treatment; I had to wait to get checked in. They treated him like
God.

He was a career bs artist, but he did have influence with really stupid politicians.


He was a bit more than a bs artist - being a prominent scientist does depend on presentation skills, but Teller did have stuff to present.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BET_theory

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

George Herold
Guest

Sat Feb 02, 2019 3:45 am   



On Friday, February 1, 2019 at 8:35:32 PM UTC-5, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
Quote:
On Saturday, February 2, 2019 at 4:09:16 AM UTC+11, John Larkin wrote:
On Thu, 31 Jan 2019 12:05:37 -0800 (PST),
bloggs.fredbloggs.fred_at_gmail.com wrote:

On Thursday, January 31, 2019 at 2:39:24 PM UTC-5, John Robertson wrote:
On 2019/01/31 11:19 a.m., John Larkin wrote:


https://www.scmp.com/news/china/science/article/2183466/chinas-plan-use-nuclear-bomb-detonator-release-shale-gas




Not new news, the USA contemplated that in the late 50s:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Oilsand (Alberta, Canada!)

https://aoghs.org/technology/project-gasbuggy/

No one ever learns...

John :-#(#

Surprised that lunatic Teller wasn't involved ...

I met him once, in the security shack at LLNL. He was very old and got
VIP treatment; I had to wait to get checked in. They treated him like
God.

Unlike several of his even more right-wing physicist contemporaries, he recognised the dangers of anthropogenic global warming.

He is also the T in BET surface gas absorbtion theory, which gave me a bit of shock when I ran into it as a final year undergraduate in 1962. Not the place you'd expect to find the father of the hydrogen bomb.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BET_theory

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney


Teller is one of the Hungarian, 'Martians'
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Martians_(scientists)

(Leo Szilard, was a fascinating man, I read some nice biography.)

George H.

Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

elektroda.net NewsGroups Forum Index - Electronics Design - I vote "crazy"

Ask a question - edaboard.com

Arabic version Bulgarian version Catalan version Czech version Danish version German version Greek version English version Spanish version Finnish version French version Hindi version Croatian version Indonesian version Italian version Hebrew version Japanese version Korean version Lithuanian version Latvian version Dutch version Norwegian version Polish version Portuguese version Romanian version Russian version Slovak version Slovenian version Serbian version Swedish version Tagalog version Ukrainian version Vietnamese version Chinese version Turkish version
EDAboard.com map