Why does nobody use nukes to fire bullets/shaped charges etc?

>>30998780
That -something- howitzer that I can't remember how to spell well enough for google to fill in the rest. I think it started with a k?

>>30998831
Caseba.

And desu, unless you're in space, there's no reason to use nuclear shaped charges when you can just, you know, nuke the bad guys.

>>30998831
This
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Davy_Crockett_(nuclear_device)

>>30998831
Atomic Annie was the howitzer. Davey Crockett was the nuclear bazooka.

>>30998848
Yeah, that is probably why I couldn't find it. Was going of how it sounded.

For a minute, I thought OP was asking why we don't use nukes to propel the projectile.

>>30998857
Nah, it's a totally different concept.

The Casaba howitzer used fusion bomb tech to basically make a ridiculously high energy x-ray laser. Not just melt your face off, but melt a city block sort of energies.

>>30998882
That is what he is asking though.

>>30998882
I did too since that is exactly how he worded it.

>>30998890
My bad, just Google it. Not x-rays but tungsten plasma.

Plasma Lance would be another hella cool name for it

It's actually a concept to defeat an alien fleet. Using kinect bombardment via launching them from earth using a nuclear blast.

>>30998882
That's exactly what I'm asking.
>what would be the point?
Asteroids, aliens, russians.

>>30998973
that's a different thing

>>30998973
>make copper plate the size of Texas
>stick bombs under it
>wait til planet is aligned
>fire

wat^ we death star now nigga

>>30998780
They did accidentally put a manhole cover into space once with one once

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Plumbbob

>>30998780
You have nukes in 20mm, torpedo etc.

Nukes only produce heat, there is no chemical reaction that increases it's volume, it would need a chamber ful lof water for it to be vaporized instantly in order to generate the pressure.
Thinking about it it would be a nice spaceship gun.

>>30999052
If you read that very article it says it probably never made it to space

File: 1465953623613.jpg (66KB, 437x437px) Image search: [Google]

66KB, 437x437px

>>30999052
Wait, so they're saying a 1 ton plate of steel burned up in the atmosphere, not coming down, but going up? Thats glorious

>>30998780
>Why does nobody use nukes to fire bullets/shaped charges etc?
You're essentially asking, "why does nobody use a dump truck dropped on an egg to crack it?"

Why?

It's a gross waste of time, effort, and materials to completely fuck everything up in the process. You don't even accomplish what you were originally trying to do, you just made a billion dollar mess.

>>30998780
It's called a Thunder Well

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Plumbbob#Propulsion_of_steel_plate_cap

>>31001280
During the Pascal-B nuclear test, a 900-kilogram (2,000 lb) steel plate cap (a piece of armor plate) was blasted off the top of a test shaft at a speed of more than 66 kilometres per second (41 mi/s). Before the test, experimental designer Dr. Brownlee had estimated that the nuclear explosion, combined with the specific design of the shaft, would accelerate the plate to approximately six times escape velocity. The plate was never found, but Dr. Brownlee believes that the plate never left the atmosphere, as it may even have been vaporized by compression heating of the atmosphere due to its high speed. The calculated velocity was sufficiently interesting that the crew trained a high-speed camera on the plate, which unfortunately only appeared in one frame, but this nevertheless gave a very high lower bound for the speed. After the event, Dr. Robert R. Brownlee described the best estimate of the cover's speed from the photographic evidence as "going like a bat out of hell!".