Even if a ship was able to withstand a nuclear bomb structurally,

>>34578816
let me put it this way, have you ever seen those down and cover videos that they showed to kids in the 50s? where if kids just hide under the table will save them from a ground zero nuke blast? there is your answer to the army's bullshit about nuke proof ships and tanks

most likely no they would be cooked by radiation.

they did some tests with a centurion tank that was 500yds from a burst iirc. i think they said they crew might have survived the initial blast.

>>34578816
This is of course a function of distance. I'd take being inside of a ship over being outside of it during a nuclear explosion any day of the week.

Not op , but how are the chances of a modern mbt like the Leo or the abrams. I'd imagine that distance from ground zero, and whatever the hell is in chobham armor could give crews a chance

>>34579110

Soviet tanks were explicitly designed to remain operational after get hit with the shockwave of a distant nuclear blast. And that includes keeping the crew alive.

>>34578911
Duck and Cover makes sense. If you're at a middle distance to the blast, being out of LoS for flying debris or flash burns can save your life.

At closer distances, it doesn't matter what you do, but it doesn't mean duck and cover is ineffective.

Again in this case, it depends. IIRC, Nagato survived initially being nuked, but the insides would have been cooked even if she remained afloat.

I"ve been to the Peace Museum in Hiroshima, and seen the photos and artifacts of the blast damage.

You're properly fucked.

>>34578816
>would the people inside have any chance for survival?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gy6-ZKWCoH0&t=213s

not really. neutrons have a habit of activating metals.

Although the Able bomb missed its target, Nevada, by nearly half a mile, and it failed to sink or to contaminate the battleship, a crew would not have survived. Goat #119, tethered inside a gun turret and shielded by armor plate, received enough fireball radiation to die four days later of radiation sickness having survived two days longer than goat #53, which was on the deck, unshielded.[83] Had Nevada been fully manned, she would likely have become a floating coffin, dead in the water for lack of a live crew. In theory, every unprotected location on the ship received 10,000 rems (100 Sv) of initial nuclear radiation from the fireball.[72] Therefore, people deep enough inside the ship to experience a 90% radiation reduction would still have received a lethal dose of 1,000 rems.[84] In the assessment of the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, "a large ship, about a mile away from the explosion, would escape sinking, but the crew would be killed by the deadly burst of radiations from the bomb, and only a ghost ship would remain, floating unattended in the vast waters of the ocean."[16]

>>34580439
That's really eerie. Imagine another ship having to be dispatched, having to locate the now ghost ship, send people aboard her wearing protective gear, having to either bury bodies at sea/store them somewhere, and then having to act as a skeleton crew or tow the ship back to port.
Maybe ships even being seized by the enemy, cleaned, and then pressed into service again.

>>34580475
nope.

they would send a small team over to search for any survivors, and to recover any sensitive materials. then they would have scuttled the ship on the spot.

>>34580488
Well we certainly would in a post-Crossroads world since we now know from then just how difficult decontaminating a ship is. At the time there were crews that reboarded their ships to sail them home after Baker because 'ship is fine' and in so doing gave themselves extra large radiation doses. In a alternate reality where WW2 went nuclear that scenario could definitely have played out, at least a few times before they figured out just how severe the radiation fuckery was.

File: homer.jpg (17KB, 639x475px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 639x475px

>>34580689
>alternate reality where WW2 went nuclear

>>34579696
What about almonds?

>>34580711
Anon is referencing Operation Downfall, probably.
>using nuclear bombs to soften up beachheads half an hour before marines make landfall

>>34580711
I meant as in everyone or at least multiple nations having them, and them getting used beyond 2 city strikes.

If for reasons of plot handwavium we say Japan somehow also has nukes you can bet there would have been plenty of use, especially since MAD couldn't yet be a thing even with both sides being nuclear armed in the Pacific, since the US couldn't reliably reach the home islands until fairly late on, and Japan of course were never within sight of the US mainland.

>>34579169
Too bad they couldnt keep the crew alive in combat situations though

>>34578816
It depends on the distance from the bomb, and to a lesser extent, where in the ship they are.

Also, modern bombs are more efficient; they put out more overpressure for less radiation than early models did. Still, though, a ship's hull can survive being closer to a blast than its crew can.

>>34580857
>they put out more overpressure for less radiation than early models did

Mostly a function of the radiation pulse diminishing faster than the over-pressure effects and thermal pulse, IIRC.

File: Object 279(1).jpg (42KB, 643x400px) Image search: [Google]

42KB, 643x400px

>>34578816
Crew survivability was never really a big part of it.
There's a lot of talk today about "it's okay if equipment is destroyed as long as personnel survive." But that isn't how total war works. When it's a matter of one nation's war economy versus another, the more expensive equipment is better saved than the people handling it. It's easy to have your soldiers knock up a bunch of ladies on the home front who can shit out more soldiers. It's fucking hard to build an aircraft carrier.

Look at pic related for example; the vehicle was designed to survive a nuclear blast from relative close ranges, but it's ability to keep out those levels of ionizing radiation is limited. So your crews get melted inside their tanks, but it's relatively easy to send people up, scrub the fuckers down, and drive them away.

What would happen to a ship if it got directly hip by a nuclear tipped AShM?

Say a p-700 with a 500kt warhead, I'd imagine it'd cease to exist no?

>>34580875
>Object 279
>That weird tank from MGS3 is actually real
Years later, Kojima is still blowing my mind.

>>34580948
It would be bad, yes. The thing about them is that the entire idea is sort of similar to the concept behind large-yield thermonuclear weapons, being "accuracy isn't a problem when you can miss the target by 2 miles and still catch it in the fireball." Hitting a ship, especially a large one, might actually mitigate some of the blast effect, causing less damage to surrounding vessels.

File: do not fuck with high velocity guns.webm (3MB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 1280x720px

>>34580875
this with a high power pressure washer.

>>34578911
>nuke proof ships and tanks
An Australian Army Mk 3 Centurion Type K, Army Registration Number 169041, was involved in a small nuclear test at Emu Field in Australia in 1953 as part of Operation Totem 1. Built as number 39/190 at the Royal Ordnance Factory, Barnbow in 1951 it was assigned the British Army number 06 BA 16 and supplied to the Australian Commonwealth Government under Contract 2843 in 1952.

It was placed less than 500 yards (460 m) from the 9.1 kt blast with its turret facing the epicentre, left with the engine running and a full ammunition load. Examination after detonation found that it had been pushed away from the blast point by about 5 feet (1.5 m), pushed slightly left and that its engine had stopped working, but only because it had run out of fuel. Antennae were missing, lights and periscopes were heavily sandblasted, the cloth mantlet cover was incinerated, and the armoured side plates had been blown off and carried up to 200 yards (180 m) from the tank. Remarkably, though, it could still be driven from the site.

169041, subsequently nicknamed The Atomic Tank, was used in the Vietnam War. In May 1969, during a firefight, 169041 (call sign 24C) was hit by a rocket-propelled grenade (RPG). The turret crew were all wounded by shrapnel as the RPG entered the lower left side of the fighting compartment, travelled diagonally across the floor and lodged in the rear right corner. Trooper Carter was evacuated, while the others remained on duty and the tank remained battleworthy.[66]

The Atomic Tank is now located at Robertson Barracks in Palmerston, Northern Territory. Although other tanks were subjected to nuclear tests, 169041 is the only one known to have withstood a blast and to go on for another 23 years of service, including 15 months on operational deployment in a war zone.

>>34580875

That's pretty morbid.

>>34582067
That's war, dude. We haven't had one in half a century.

>>34582023
The only thing you'd need to hose out is the vomit. The bodies wouldn't have any visible damage to them from the gamma&neutron pulse.

>>34580817
or fed in out of combat situations

>>34579169
>Soviet tanks were explicitly designed to remain operational after get hit with the shockwave of a distant nuclear blast
No. T-72 series are notoriously bad at surviving blast wave. It bends bottom armor plate and jams autoloader.

File: maxresdefault.jpg (164KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

164KB, 1920x1080px

>>34582142
I'm sorry, but if we are not fighting World War 3 with Desolator shock troopers and bodies aren't being reduced to gee goop, then I don't think I want to live through this hypothetical war!

>>34582161
green g(l)oop

>>34578911
There is nothing bullshit about. Flash from nuke blast can be 2-3 seconds, from large thermonuclear device up to 10-15 seconds. if you quick with hiding (and it is possible) it may reduce severity of burns by order of magnitude. And thermal radiation has largest lethal radius of all effects from 100Kt+ nukes.

File: Pranks-11.gif (2MB, 250x253px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 250x253px

Yes, but only the guy who's name is Roach!

>>34579110
Pretty sure Abrams have DU armor, given its density, it should protect a fair bit, similar to how lead walls can protect you as well.

File: SIA2010-0973_large.jpg (76KB, 1000x607px) Image search: [Google]

76KB, 1000x607px

>>34580948
Here's Crossroads Baker. See the dark spot on the right of the stem? That's the Arkansas, standing upright. All 26000 tons of her. The 23kt bomb sat 90 feet below the surface and 170 yards away from the Arkansas.

A direct hit even with a very small yield warhead would utterly destroy any ship. Some of the larger warheads would most likely outright evaporate most of a carrier.

>>34582167
Likewise, hitting the deck will greatly reduce the risk of the blast wave knocking you down or outright blowing you away, and will also greatly reduce the risk of getting hit by flying debris.

File: bg.jpg (426KB, 2880x1620px) Image search: [Google]

426KB, 2880x1620px

>>34578816

Only if its pic related

>>34582202
> Uhh Russians are Evil
> Russians just send solders to death

Yet most things are NBC protected

Really makes you think

>>34578911

The benefit is the distance you can survive.

If an NBC protected mechanised unit can remain as combat effective at half the distance from the centre of the blast compared to an ordinary unit, you have just reduced the effective area covered by the enemies tactical nuke arsenal by 75%, as well as improved the effectiveness of your own (by allowing its use in closer proximity to your forces).

>>34582242
pls anon, try retaining your brain cells next time.
i never said Russians are evil
you asked a question, i answered
NBC protection doesn't help you if a nuclear blast is nearby, it is designed to protect in irradiated zones where higher than usual radiation levels exist.
it is really just an over glorified air filter

>>34580875
>Crew survivability was never really a big part of it.
>There's a lot of talk today about "it's okay if equipment is destroyed as long as personnel survive." But that isn't how total war works. When it's a matter of one nation's war economy versus another, the more expensive equipment is better saved than the people handling it. It's easy to have your soldiers knock up a bunch of ladies on the home front who can shit out more soldiers. It's fucking hard to build an aircraft carrier.

You are idiot and full of shit. It is even harder and more expensive to train competent crews and aircrews for entire carrier battle group.

>>34580439
RIP goats.

>>34580439
> Goat #119, tethered inside a gun turret and shielded by armor plate, received enough fireball radiation to die four days later of radiation sickness having survived two days longer than goat #53

goat number 119, goat number 53... don't tell me nevada went into her last stand with a crew of at least 119 goats

>>34582240
The must be some kind of way out of here!

>>34580875
>training a retard to a retard useable for basic guard duty takes 3 months (basic)
>training him to be a halfway useable actual soldier in any relevant role takes another 3 months (school of infantry / Spezialgrundausbildung)
>to actually get him prepared to survive real-life combat by veteran trainers instead of just textbook scenarios takes at least another 3 to 6 months (deployment training and preparation)
>during this entire time you have to feed, clothe, pay wage and supply this guy
>dipshits think that this is Warhammer 40k and we just have infinite people who love dying for the cause

Compare to
>tank
>only costs when in use, can be parked in a hangar practically forever with little deterioration
>with optimized production, can be shat out in a week or less if shit's good
>no wage, no retirement, no veteran benefits
>nobody gives a shit if a tank burns out compared to if a person burns alive

People are always more important than kit. Primarily because they are people, and caring for them is important no matter how hoorah warrior culture you pretend to be. Cynically, because they are in fact more expensive to keep around than their equipment is.

>>34578816
I bet their ears would ring for a bit but otherwise they'd be fine.

File: 1499551290474.png (66KB, 420x247px) Image search: [Google]

66KB, 420x247px

>>34582469
>nobody gives a shit if a tank burns out compared to if a person burns alive

implying

a tank destroyed in combat attracts more attention than some infantryman who was burned alive when some truck or building been hit by a shell or a bomb

also as lord byron has said "men are more easily made than machinery"

>>34582501
He was wrong

>>34582501
>lord byron
Dead by 1824, just early enough to miss the change of mass production and true industrialization.

It takes 18 years for a soldier to be ready to recieve the year-long training necessary for thim to be a raw recruit on the frontline. Tanks come in a week tops if your country is at serious war. Get with the times buddy, we're not in the rennaisance. Or in Warhammer 40k.

>>34580815
There is actually a documentary about how germany tried to ship all of its fissile uranium to Japan in a submarine. I believe the submarine was captured enroute though.

>>34582516
funnily but that quote is directly related to the advent of mass production, the machinery that's more important than human lives from that poem it's power looms

>>34582038
nukes do give supper powers

>>34580875
>It's easy to have your soldiers knock up a bunch of ladies on the home front who can shit out more soldiers
This might not have crossed your mind, but it's not a combat-ready soldier that pops out after those nine months of gestation.

File: IMG_6516.jpg (24KB, 250x200px) Image search: [Google]

24KB, 250x200px

>>34582416
>ANCHORS AWAY MY BOYS, AAAANCHORS AWAAAAY

>>34582189
So we cant expect nuking turkey would solve the german problem...

>>34580867
>radiation pulse diminishing faster than the over-pressure effects and thermal pulse,
Nice bro science,bro.

>>34582416
Imagine the screams...

>>34582038
9.1 kilotons is pretty damned small for a nuke but 500 yards is pretty damned close for a nuke.

>>34582142
You'd probably need to scour uranium dust from the hull and the bodies might be pretty damned radioactive after all that.

...actually, the hull could very well be irradiated with enough exposure.

>>34582999
Reminds me of a video I watched where they locked pigs in wooden boxes and then set off a nuke at a unknown distance. You see the boxes burn with the flash of light and the pigs squealing their lifes away.

>>34582532
Technical expertise and limits of manpower for manufacturing actually turns this around. During WW1 we actually had nations having to choose between people in factories making guns and ammo and people in the trenches using said guns and ammo.

>>34583086
You better find it. That sounds horrific and my vegetarian friend needs to be linked.

>>34582501

Yeah, no.

Well trained and experienced crew are more valuable than equipment, this is not 1800 anymore where it takes the Royal Armory a week to turn out 60 brown bess muskets and a cannon. In the age of mass production we have the capability to produce things so fast that Bethlehem Steel launched more than a ship a day in WWII, and that was just one company on top of the thousands of other producing millions of other munitions, vehicles, and equipment.

A soldier needs months of training to truly be prepared for any specialized roll, and before that ideally 18 years of life just growing up, maybe you can push it to 15 or 16 if times are tough, but the point is nobody being born when the war starts will be done with elementary school before the war ends.

Not to mention losing crew and troops usually means losing more equipment and then more troops. If your well trained and experienced men all die you have green recruits in all your planes and tanks and they just end up dying more, meaning more green troops and less equipment as well. If they live to fight another day your shit usually lasts longer, and you can train your troops better, and they last longer to become experienced and so on.

>>34582976

He's right, though. The acute radiation from an atom bomb is most signfigant on a very small device (Davy Crockett or the like). Normal air is actually opaque to sufficiently high-energy gamma rays and x-rays, so in a large bomb the thermal effects of the IR flash (which can pass through air) becomes more signfigant.

>>34583133
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OYUSKWhb3sk

>>34582023
>>34582023
Sorry of webm?

>>34583436
Cheers. I'll give it a look when I'm not at work

>>34583086
I bet that smelled delicious.

>>34583436
That audio is fake. Those cameras weren't recording audio.

>>34583567
No shit sherlock

>>34583567
But they were still cooked alive

>>34583651
>Reminds me of a video I watched where they locked pigs in wooden boxes and then set off a nuke at a unknown distance. You see the boxes burn with the flash of light and the pigs squealing their lifes away.

>>34582939
>SHTF and the world is glassed
>Turkey remains
>world is now colonized by turkroaches

>>34583530
french tankers meet german bias

>>34582325
I agree. My friend (former airforce navigator) estimated in his initial training they spent upwards of 2 million dollars on him. That's one man. Not including readiness training. New training and equipment ups the amount even more. That's one guy on a plane. Not even the pilot. Granted I bet land based systems are less expensive to train on but imagine how many more they are.

>>34582416
tell me more about these ships full of goats...

>>34582218
I recently met someone who was there during the testing. Really interesting guy.

>>34578816
>would the people inside have any chance for survival?
Yes.

If it's strong enough to withstand a direct blast, then it has enough mass and/or whipple shields to be radiation proof.

If it's strong enough to withstand an indirect blast, then there is (likely) enough mass to ensure that some of the crew doesn't catch acute radiation poisoning and die in a few days/weeks. As for the fallout meme, fire suppression systems and infinite water means that there is no non-negligible degree of additional radiation. Water is very very good at washing away fallout.

>>34578816
unless you're actually exposed to it directly, the radiation isnt that bad.

If you dig a hole and cover it up with a wood lid, and then waited, say 48 hours after the detonation, you'd probably be fine.

>>34585576
>If you dig a hole and cover it up with a wood lid
This. If you dug deep enough, you could be 10 feet away from the nuke and experience zero radiation.
It's all a function of geometry and mass.

>>34580787
>Operation Downfall
Jesus, this is scary stuff.
>"[p]lanning for the invasion of the main Japanese home islands had reached its final stages, and if the landings actually took place, we might supply about fifteen atomic bombs to support the troops.
>Seeman advised that American troops not enter an area hit by a bomb for "at least 48 hours"; the risk of nuclear fallout was not well understood
Any more good hypothetical operations to read about?

>>34580875
I came here to laugh at you and tell you you're a fucking retard

File: 1489780160472.png (177KB, 436x361px) Image search: [Google]

177KB, 436x361px

>>34585592

>If you dug deep enough, you could be 10 feet away from the nuke and experience zero radiation.

>>34585742
10 feet horizontally

>>34585638
>the risk of nuclear fallout was not well understood
But anon, the curve is exponential. With the efficiency of nukes at the time, 48 hours wasn't unreasonable.

File: German_cruiser_Blücher_sinking.jpg (58KB, 650x367px) Image search: [Google]

58KB, 650x367px

>>34580475

They'd probably have to scuttle the ship. The blast would've destroyed the onboard electronics and much of the machinery, including pumps.

>>34585786
geometry says emp should be the lowest at the center.

>>34585576
How are you planning to do that on a ship?

>>34585768
Inefficient nukes makes for lots of fallout. Small nukes makes for concentrated fallout. Small, inefficient nukes means you stay away from ground zero for a long time to come.

>>34585915
Less than 2% fissioned. Which means there was very little fallout.

>>34585994
>Less than 2% fissioned.
Which means you'd be breathing quite a bit of uranium or plutonium dust. That's not good for you anon.

>>34586030
Which have half lives of a couple hundred million years which means you could be buried in a sphere of 100 feet wide and experience negligible radiation.
Plutonium has a hl of a couple dozen thousand years, so it's radiation is somewhat present, but still basically still negligible.
Fission products are the dangerous things, not the fission materials.

>>34582416
>don't tell me nevada went into her last stand with a crew of at least 119 goats
There weren't many more goats than that in total spread over a bunch of different ships so not quite, although she would also have likely had a compliment of pigs and mice on board as well.

>>34585533
see
>>34580439
A WW2 battleship wasn't considered close to enough mass to protect you from a lethal dosage after a close range detonation, even though she survived the blast, and is in a way probably better protected against the prompt radiation since it has a far greater portion of its mass concentrated in heavy armoring on the upper levels, ie between the crew and the incoming radiation, compared to a modern ship.

>>34578816
Nope

>>34580754
>he doesn't activate his almonds
Bro

>>34582023
t-those are just dummies or mannequins or something, right...?

>>34578816
If the shock wave/heat doesn't kill you the massive amounts of radiation will

>>34585592
but what about millions of degrees fireball and 10+ tons psi pressure. Pretty confident that will turn you into dust.

>>34585638
Operation unthinkable is pretty interesting

>>34582023
BUT THE CHIEFTAIN SAID DEATH TRAPS WAS A LIE

File: 1495580915597s.jpg (3KB, 125x120px) Image search: [Google]

3KB, 125x120px

>>34585638
Operation Northwoods is insightful.


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

>>34580875
No have no concept of which you speak.
The men have always been the most expensive and hardest to replace part of a weapon system.

Look at kamikaze's, the best pilots suicide themselves into ships. Suddenly, training new pilots to a competent level is nearly impossible because all your best pilots suicided themselves into ships.

>>34588546
Cooper worked on the ones which were all fucked up, not the ones which worked well enough to keep their crews alive.
If all you saw was murder death kill, day in and day out, you'd have a certain special kind of perspective, too.
Plenty of MkIVs, Panthers, and Tigers ended up the same way. No tank is perfect.

>>34588997
No.

Japan never rotated veteran pilots home to teach. So the good pilots just kept on flying until shit down.

File: prisoner exchange 1944.jpg (146KB, 1165x737px) Image search: [Google]

146KB, 1165x737px

>>34588382

>"Alright you Jerries. You have the most experience with these sons of bitches. We're going to feed you, we're going to arm you, and together we all are going push their shit back to Russia."

Worst timeline confirmed

>>34589316
This was so fucking illogical with Japan. Germany, I can understand considering they are within striking distance. The IItalians, sure. But Japan had yers before any serious consistant air campaign could be mounted.

It's the same with their convoy systems. They thought it was not important compared to proper fleet action. No wonder why the Army and Navy hated each other so terribly.

>>34580857
Modern nuclear weapons produce less fallout per kiloton, but they produce more ionizing radiation in the initial blast, especially for neutron bombs.

>>34583086
It's in the Atomic Bomb Movie, "Trinity and Beyond"

>>34589937
>Oi Fritz, get that 42 of yers trained on those ruskies!
Would be interesting to have seen Brits working alongside the Germans. Especially with Dresden and the London Blitz having happened.

File: 1493425787679.png (305KB, 451x430px) Image search: [Google]

305KB, 451x430px

>>34582038
>An Australian Army Mk 3 Centurion Type K
>small nuclear test at Emu Field
>Emu Field

File: 1944II.png (2MB, 819x1319px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 819x1319px

>>34588382
>>34589937
>>34591975

Rommel, his wife and son war gamed this in 44

>>34580857
This dumb meme again
Repeat after me children
"Only large thermonuclear bombs can be extremely efficient which is why the most efficient nuclear bomb ever created was the b41."

>>34592156
Good read. Thanks

If you ever watched that one movie about Hiroshima.

There were survivors (blast) who were within several hundred yards of ground zero. They were behind brick buildings and one was in a street car.

Most later succumb to rad poisoning from fallout.

File: FhPdSNK.png (2MB, 1100x863px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1100x863px

>>34592155
>Taken shortly after the strike

>>34592156
Is it bad that I kinda wished this happened and we could get rid of the commies once and for all?

>>34593433
No.

>>34593433
Only good commie is a dead commie, but with Americas current climate it seems we are slowly turning into them.

>>34593433
At the end of the war, German officers were approaching American officers with their maps and locations of Soviet troop locations and movements They knew the stakes, but just didn't have the resources left to push back on their own. It's probably one of the greatest missed opportunities after the war and if things got bad, America was still the sole nuclear state.

Yall realize that nukes are exaggerated propaganda weapons right?

They arent useable in combat

>>34594040
area denial weapons

>>34594065
Yeah for the next 50 fucking years

>>34594065
Its more like they can only be planted and detonated, not fired or launched. War is about increasing control over the world. Nukes are about increasing control over war.

>>34588382
>>34589937
>>34591975
>>34592156
There is this book "Red inferno" where paranoid Stalin attacks american forces just after encircling berlin and Yankees and Jerries have to fight together. Pretty good read.

>>34584552
Cool story bro.

>>34594079
The people currently living in Hiroshima would like a word with you anon.

File: LSM-60_Bikini.jpg (64KB, 767x611px) Image search: [Google]

64KB, 767x611px

>>34582218
They never even found a remnant of the ship used to anchor the bomb for Crossroads Baker. That was a 200-foot LSM 90 feet above a 23Kt device.

>>34578816
Most ships can survive a nuke that is 500m or more away. The problem is the water thrown everywhere by the explosive solvates and thus contains the vast majority of the fallout. This makes the surviving ships radioactive coffins for their crews.

That said, nuking a CBG does not instantly stop their flight ops as it will take days to weeks for the crews to die. Further, more ships could come in spray down the ship in a massive decontamination program and have it back up and running in ~2weeks.

TLDR: The crew will die of accute radiation poisoning, but the ship will probably be fine, just needs some decontamination and a new crew. see >>34580439


.