Status-6 with Cobalt-60 Isotope loaded "Salted Bomb"

>>32316321
Yeah this was bullshit, it was a propaganda stunt.

File: project-pluto[1].gif (65KB, 1000x451px) Image search: [Google]

65KB, 1000x451px

If they can have weaponry like that, then I think it's time to revive this.

File: 67c53c97gw1f4hsvjt91oj21bk0qrmzk.jpg (25KB, 690x388px) Image search: [Google]

25KB, 690x388px

>"Childrens of the ABM"

DF-ZF Hypersonic Glider reporting!

File: 1379226727966.jpg (68KB, 615x618px) Image search: [Google]

68KB, 615x618px

>>32316321
Its a bluff, such a weapon would actually be counter intuitive. No one designs a nuclear weapon with the intent that it would ever really be used, but you still want it to be as effective as possible just in case. The most important aspects are its ability to respond quickly, the time between launch and arrival, and its accuracy. This weapon would have a pretty awful response time and the between launch and arrival would be utterly abysmal (it would occupy a very awkward place in Russia's nuclear arsenal and the command would likely find it a frustrating tool to call upon). That and it would require investing in costly new delivery systems that offer little benefit over traditional SLBMs.

They would also come under international scorn should they ever officially announce that they have in fact created such a weapon. Additional sanctions and further damage to Russia's reputation could leave them politically and economically isolated from their most important partners. If they can't actually announce they have such a weapon then it isn't very useful considering it would lose its ability to deter attacks against the country; you don't build the doomsday device and not tell anyone about it because then you might as well not even have it. The intent of the leak was likely meant to spook foreign intelligence services and potentially motivate another country to spend money to defend a weapon that probably doesn't exist.

File: sting2.jpg (51KB, 614x387px) Image search: [Google]

51KB, 614x387px

>>32316510
Space Railgun that shoots nukes as well.

File: tmp_6290-160927210830-tk-ah0927-full-169-529047371.jpg (89KB, 1600x900px) Image search: [Google]

89KB, 1600x900px

>>32316512
>No one designs a nuclear weapon with the intent that it would ever really be used

How can one follow the logic of deterrence if you don't believe in it? It only works when you believe in it and your opponent believes that you believe it - vice versa.

>>32316534
We SOLG now

>>32316321
>How much do you have to hate the Amerikanskii, if you plan to not only nuke them with a 100 Megaton device that creates artificial tsunamis, but also literally salt their soil with Cobalt-60 Isotope to deny any biologic activity in the next 100 years?


You only have to be scared shitless of ABM systems surrounding your country and weakening your deterrence.

Even if that weakening will just impact in a minor sense upon your thousands of warheads, it is still scary and warrants a response.

>>32316576
You want it to work well should you ever use it and you want the enemy to know how good your stuff is so that the costs of a conflict would out weigh any benefit. For deterrence to work you simply need to show that you will be able to devastate your attacker should they ever try anything. Its really just a cost/benefit examination taken to an extreme, the belief that a nuclear war will be a futile action with unjustifiable costs and no benefit is sufficient to ensure that both sides will be deterred from taking action against one another.

Conflicts can potentially escalate from conventional to nuclear conflicts, but there is nothing to be gained should the nuclear option be the first one chosen.

>>32316634

That didn't answer the point.

You're working from the basis that you're unwilling to use nuclear weapons, why would you be a credible threat if you are unwilling to use your capability?

Nuclear weapons don't need to be fired to be "used", their very existence is them being used.

>>32316709
Countries are unwilling to use their nuclear weapons because there is nothing to be gained, and the losses will be totally unjustifiable (if you exclude all moral and ethical issues). The reality is that there is no threat outside of an accidental launch or false warning of an attack, the credible threat comes from retaliation. If country A attacks country B (both have nukes), even if B had no prior hostility to A but A nukes B, then B will likely retaliate in kind because A just gave it all the reason they need. If one country is attacked by another then the costs/balances of a nuclear attack are off the table and retaliation is the most likely response.

Beneath the Planet of the Apes - 1970

File: 0_v9aq_jn7XJkywhlv[1].jpg (26KB, 640x360px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 640x360px

a... Doomsday Device?

>>32316576
>>32316709


>No one designs a nuclear weapon with the intent that it would ever really be used, but you still want it to be as effective as possible just in case

I think his point was that what weapons you DO build, better be effective. Even if your public statement is "we really, really don't wanna have to get into any shit with anybody, but if we ever have to, here's what we've got", with the idea being that your potential enemies say "ah fuck, it ain't worth messing with them then, if they're gonna fuck us right back"

The Status-6 is not terribly effective compared to traditional nuclear weapons (which are mostly aimed at military infrastructure, command and control, and nuclear silos/bomber bases). If two militaries strike each other's military assets in an attempt to weaken each other's counter striker abilities, that's one thing. The world would frown upon it, but it's a more acceptable version of what we've come to accept as "war"

But to just say "fuck you" by killing millions of innocent civilians, and rubbing cobalt salt into the wound by making the surrounding area an exponentially amplified version of Chernobyl would basically be unjustified to anybody, even other nuclear military powers around the world

>tl:dr, US and Russia nuke each other silos/Air force bases:
"OMG so terrible but that's war, they had to neutralize the enemy threat of retaliation "
>Russia nukes Boston and there's no strategic advantage besides just hatefucking 5 million people and rendering 5 states usleess for 100 years:
"Dude...WTF" from literally everybody

>>32316382
>Implying there isn't one or two collecting dust in some hangar at Area 51 or Diego Garcia just in case the Russians decide to get uppity.

File: IMG_7551.jpg (87KB, 850x354px) Image search: [Google]

87KB, 850x354px

>>32316809
Love the bomb!

>>32316321
In mutually assured destruction you want to make sure destruction is ensured. Russia is kind of a POS country right now. They couldn't win any large scale war. But if they can say "Hey, fuck with us and we use this" then no one fucks with them.

>>32319731
They have plenty of that already.
Building a bomb like this is absolutely excessive.
The only reason we're not deploying ground-base lasers for missile defense, tungsten rods in the sky, and nuclear ramjets is because we don't want to start an arms race with Russia. The more vile your tech gets, the more likely you are to use it. Unlike regular nukes, when you use a cobalt bomb, you become the king of nothing. At least regular nukes leave something behind for you to work with.

>Doomsday weapons
>Being concerned

Russia fires these off they'll get nuked back into the stoneage. Real win there

>>32319478
>implying we built any when everyone involved knew if the russians found out about it it'd be WWIII right then and there

>>32316512
The President loves surprises.

>>32319731
>But if they can say "Hey, fuck with us and we use this" then no one fucks with them.
And they did say exactly that last year.

File: IMG_7552.jpg (34KB, 231x300px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 231x300px

Isn't setting off a dirty bomb an act of terror?
So... Russia+terror+oil = invasion time!

>>32320953
Yeah try cunt i will kill you and put explosives in your corp

File: trump-putin-puppet.jpg (155KB, 854x1152px) Image search: [Google]

155KB, 854x1152px

>>32320953
A puppet can't attack his puppeteer.

File: tmp_7250-14812069599052000905750.jpg (75KB, 960x960px) Image search: [Google]

75KB, 960x960px

>>32321029

>>32320246
>The more vile your tech gets, the more likely you are to use it.
Disagree. Weapons like this are just posturing between Russia and America. They can't ever be used.

Conventional weapons are more dangerous in a lot of ways because people WILL and DO use them. Look at thermobarics. Look at daisy cutters, MOABs, fuel air, etc.

The fire bombing of Japan was far more devastating than the nukes.

File: IMG_7620.jpg (1B, 486x500px)

1B, 486x500px

>>32321029
That's what you think!

>>32316512
I read all of that in his voice....and it was glorious

>>32316512
You fail to understand russians. The only thing that makes russians continue to live in the man made hell that is the russian society is a burning hatred for his fellow man.
Then again, "fellow man" is a bit of a misnomer when it comes to russians as they are less than human. That does not exactly decrease their hate though.
This weapon makes perfect sense to russians as it is vile, despicable and underhanded, just like the russians themselves.
They can use it and then proceed to PROOFS??? themselves through the resulting confusion long enough for them to fully enjoy the suffering they inflicted before being liberated from the horrors of russian life by nuclear fire.

>>32316321
OP, The whole concept here is so fucking stupid it beggars belief. To make a weapon that strong the radioactive field surrounding it before launch would render it completely impractical at best, and inoperational at worst.

Source: Nuke eng fag here.

>>32321597
Also, it's super fucking expensive to make.

>>32321597
What do you mean by "a strong ing radioactive field before launch"? The only radioactive sources in a nuclear weapon before use are the primary stage and the tamper

>>32321629
His retarded Co-60 salt layer bullshit thing.

File: 1462329274536.jpg (28KB, 500x364px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 500x364px

>>32321029

>>32321646
The cobalt is only radioactive post explosion because the metal used is ordinary non radioactive cobalt 59 that is irradiated into cobalt 60. That guy is full of shit

>>32320321
....why would it be?

>>32321437
Well no, the firebombing of Tokyo killed more than the initial explosions did.
The after effects, burns, cancer etc ended up killing more than the firebombing did.
>>32321029
Ho Chi Minh wants a word with you.

You need to know one thing about Russia

of their weapons 60% are pure bullshit. KGB has been coming up with that shit since the 50's and FSB does it now.

Russia is a paper tiger they have no chances in either a conventional or nuclear war. This is why the US needs to bring down the foot on them, HARD, because its a fucking bluff. Our leaders were used to dealing with this shit back when we had balls. Syria was a perfect opportunity to show them their place.

And now you unemployed assholes went and elected a mole, KGB's wet dream for almost a hundred years. Good job.

>>32321899
Honestly, I know /k/ hates Hillary on principle but I was all for the no fly zone.
Fuck Russia, Turkey gets to shoot their planes down, why can't we?

>>32321899
Hillary pls

>>32321913
The last no fly zone we had was over Iraq in the 90's. It didn't exactly work out.

If you have an expiration date on it, the enemy can simply wait until you leave.

If you make an open ended commitment, the enemy can shoot at you at will and generate propaganda any time you hit him back.

One of the main reasons we pushed Saddam's shit in after 9/11 was that we'd maintained a fucking no fly zone for EIGHT FUCKING YEARS and gotten nothing except bullet holes to show for it. Plus the Oil for Food program, which made Saddam and the French very rich, and starved the Iraqis. More propaganda. It was time to shit or get off the pot.

No fly zones are cancer. Never again.

>>32316382
What is it

>>32321978
No, you misunderstood Phil, fuck Russia.
Provoke them into a war, push their shit in and turn their country over to something productive.

>>32321597
>radioactive field surrounding it
there's no such thing as a "radioactive field". there are radioactive particles, ionizing radiation and the electromagnetic field.

>>32321913
And Turkey gets its helo downed by k*rds with Russian missile after it, and Erdogan personally say sorry to Putin.

>>32321899
Their nuclear forces is not so shit, ask Oppenheimer. We can win nuclear war but losses will be very serious

>>32316583
>Belka intensifies

File: sensible chuckle.gif (2MB, 320x384px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 320x384px

>>32321583
geiger counter is going off the charts over the amount of cobalt salt in this post

>>32322000
A hypersonic cruise missile fueled by a nuclear reactor. It carried 20 warheads, and after it deployed them would continue to do low altitude passes, which would wreck buildings.

>>32322000
Project Pluto
A nuke that flies to the target deploys a mirv and leaks radiation everywhere as it loiters around russian until it crashes.

File: klavesin 2r pm.jpg (214KB, 937x601px) Image search: [Google]

214KB, 937x601px

It's not a question of hate, it's a matter of convenience. Cobalt is the only weapon that could cause massive radiation even having been detonated underwater. A fission-fusion-fission bomb can also be designed to have a large residual radiological hazard, but in that case the torpedo must launch itself out of the water to 3-5km to be effective.

>>32316512
>Its a bluff
It's a tested prototype since two weeks ago
http://freebeacon.com/national-security/russia-tests-nuclear-capable-drone-sub/
>That and it would require investing in costly new delivery systems that offer little benefit over traditional SLBMs.
Soviet Union had nuclear-tipped torpedoes going back to the 1950s. The UUV capable of delivering it across the Pacific has become operational in 2015.
http://www.navyrecognition.com/index.php/news/defence-news/2016/june-2016-navy-naval-forces-defense-industry-technology-maritime-security-global-news/4133-russias-rubin-design-bureau-produces-klavesin-2r-pm-uuv-demonstrator.html
>it would occupy a very awkward place in Russia's nuclear arsenal
The thinking would be that this weapon can destroy biological life and lead to massive extinction across large swaths of earth. Which makes it the ultimate “Doomsday” weapon and fits in with the Russian style of MAD, much like the Dead Hand system from the Cold War. Alternatively, it can be used for preemptive strike on Kings Bay or Puget Sound to neutralize US submarines in Cuban Missile crisis scenario.
>They would also come under international scorn
Plain ridiculous and utterly laughable.

I don't know of another weapon more cruel than the Russian monstrosity that creates tidal waves and poisons the coast for decades. Russians really have gone... MAD.

File: 1432653442837.png (535KB, 484x544px) Image search: [Google]

535KB, 484x544px

what is even the point?

>attacking the coast with nuclear torpedos is a terrible limited ineffective way of damaging the enemy
>cobolting sea life doesn't degrade the enemies ability to shoot back and nobody aside from PETA will care in the short term about muh SeaKittens

literally an Oscar class(or even a Charlie or Echo) armed with nuclear cruise missiles is a better nuclear weapons platform and probably stealthier too

russian sub ops have become a meme

File: 1aWhljv.jpg (30KB, 500x503px) Image search: [Google]

30KB, 500x503px

>>32316321

Am i the only one to whom smells a disinformation campaign?

A top secret programm gets "accidentally" revealed by an official holding a fucking picture of it with an oversized font for the description into the cameras field of view.

seems legit!

>>32322000
Look up project pluto. It might be the most terrifying thing humans have ever created.

>>32322772

*to whom this smells like

>>32316321
>100 Megaton device that creates artificial tsunamis,

You have no concept of just how much energy is needed for even a 10 foot wave.

>>32321583
I'm saving this post for posterity as it is the wisest thing to ever be written on /k/

>>32321583
It's funny because it's true

ICBM can be intercepted by ABM. Project Pluto can be shot down with SAM.

Nothing can intercept 185кm/h torpedo on 1000 meter depth.

File: 1469737589436.jpg (19KB, 295x325px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 295x325px

>>32322000

The most metal thing ever thought up by American scientists.

>hypersonic
>low altitude
>powered by motherfucking nuclear reactor
>drops presents (see: nuke) for all the good Russians
>flying over infantry formations would have shredded them from the shock wave
>continues to salt Russian soil for months on end until it finally crashes
>continues to leak radiation

File: ProjectOrion-Starboard.jpg (23KB, 428x300px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 428x300px

>>32322859
>The most metal thing ever thought up by American scientists.
How mundane, Trump should restart development on the orion class space battleship.

File: 1474482588396.jpg (7KB, 269x188px) Image search: [Google]

7KB, 269x188px

>>32322989

I knew someone would mention the Orion.

Ok a nuclear battleship is a bit more metal.

>>32322859
>Supersonic not hypersonic
>Just another cruise missile
>Can be easily shot down even over american soil

>>32323017
>getting to US soil

lel

>>32323265
MIRV can easily get to the US soil and shot down SLAM by EMP and shockwave.

>>32320271
>they'll get nuked back into the stoneage.
Outside of the Russia that lays west of Moscow, this would be considered an improvement.