Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst ... 345
Results 41 to 48 of 48

Thread: Commissioning of carrier George H.W. Bush to be held tomorrow

  1. #41
    Sage
    bhkad's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Last Seen
    08-13-10 @ 01:01 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    10,745

    Re: Commissioning of carrier George H.W. Bush to be held tomorrow

    Quote Originally Posted by obvious Child View Post
    That can be said for any major base. A nuclear suicide attack on Kadena would cripple that base and we have a large amount of Air Force assets there. This problem is actually a bigger threat for air force and Army then it is for the navy as the Navy rarely has lots of assets in any port at any one time, unlike the Air Force or land based units which don't have the advantage of being able to sit out in the middle of the ocean for weeks at a time (or months if you're a sub). Imagine a suicide nuclear attack on Fort Hood. That would be much worse. We can deal with a relative few ship losses (don't forget under overhauls ships generally don't have full crews). Having thousands upon thousands of soldiers vaporized is something entirely different. 65,000 soldiers and their families are stationed there. The super base model we're going to presents some serious inherent threats for different branches of the military.

    Luckily the Navy realizes the inherent threat of lots of ships in one harbor at any one time. I've never heard of more then one or two carriers being worked on extensively at any one port at any time. Apparently we still abide to the lessons of 12/7/1941.
    Nice info!

    OBL 11/24/02

  2. #42
    Sage
    bhkad's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Last Seen
    08-13-10 @ 01:01 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    10,745

    Re: Commissioning of carrier George H.W. Bush to be held tomorrow


    OBL 11/24/02

  3. #43
    Sage
    Renae's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    San Antonio Texas
    Last Seen
    10-23-17 @ 10:14 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    38,972
    Blog Entries
    15

    Re: Commissioning of carrier George H.W. Bush to be held tomorrow

    Quote Originally Posted by obvious Child View Post
    That can be said for any major base. A nuclear suicide attack on Kadena would cripple that base and we have a large amount of Air Force assets there. This problem is actually a bigger threat for air force and Army then it is for the navy as the Navy rarely has lots of assets in any port at any one time, unlike the Air Force or land based units which don't have the advantage of being able to sit out in the middle of the ocean for weeks at a time (or months if you're a sub). Imagine a suicide nuclear attack on Fort Hood. That would be much worse. We can deal with a relative few ship losses (don't forget under overhauls ships generally don't have full crews). Having thousands upon thousands of soldiers vaporized is something entirely different. 65,000 soldiers and their families are stationed there. The super base model we're going to presents some serious inherent threats for different branches of the military.

    Luckily the Navy realizes the inherent threat of lots of ships in one harbor at any one time. I've never heard of more then one or two carriers being worked on extensively at any one port at any time. Apparently we still abide to the lessons of 12/7/1941.
    Very good points, but having spent a few years in the Navy I know that is one of the issues we always worry about. My father said one of the worst things about the BRACH after the cold war ended was the fact so much was put into so few bases. This was done to save money, and the more military units assigned to a base, the more money that area will get.

    So there is the political ramifications. Do you know how big Ft. Hood is?

    Fort Hood is located at 31°7'48" North, 97°46'49" West (31.130072, -97.780260).[2]

    According to the United States Census Bureau, the CDP has a total area of 15.0 square miles (38.8 kmē), of which, 14.9 square miles (38.7 kmē) of it is land and 0.1 square miles (0.1 kmē) of it is water. The total area is 0.33% water.
    Fort Hood - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    Nukes are NOT magic weapons, for a nuke to be most effect it has to be an air burst.

    A 20 kiloton nuclear weapon, which would be the TOP end of a terrorist weapon, unless they managed to get their hands on a thermonuclear device, has a blast radius and damage area of: (all distances are in Kilometers)
    20 Kt Crater Dia. 0.108 Fireball Dia. 0.146 Destruction Radius 0.745 Heavy Damage 1.158 Moderate Damage 1.655 Light Damage
    2.608
    If they got a bigger weapon, highly unlikely, but let's say a tactical nuke, top end 200kt.

    200 Kt Crater Dia. 0.232 Fireball Dia. 0.368 Destruction Radius 1.604 Heavy Damage 2.495 Moderate Damage 3.565 Light Damage 4.456
    As you can see, most of the base would survive, and reality check is even a strike at the heart of the base wouldn't be as catastrophic as you made out.

    However an air burst might be able to achieve near that sort of devastation:

    Medium Airburst (5.3 kilometers)

    x4.00 x4.00 x4.00 x4.00
    Nuclear Explosion Facts

    I'm not saying these numbers are solid, after all it's a geocities link, but it's good enough for this.

    It would be far easier to run a ship into Norfolk Harbor and really muck things up then to hit Ft. Hood.

  4. #44
    Sage
    Renae's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    San Antonio Texas
    Last Seen
    10-23-17 @ 10:14 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    38,972
    Blog Entries
    15

    Re: Commissioning of carrier George H.W. Bush to be held tomorrow

    Quote Originally Posted by MrVicchio View Post
    Very good points, but having spent a few years in the Navy I know that is one of the issues we always worry about. My father said one of the worst things about the BRACH after the cold war ended was the fact so much was put into so few bases. This was done to save money, and the more military units assigned to a base, the more money that area will get.

    So there is the political ramifications. Do you know how big Ft. Hood is?

    Fort Hood - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    Nukes are NOT magic weapons, for a nuke to be most effect it has to be an air burst.

    A 20 kiloton nuclear weapon, which would be the TOP end of a terrorist weapon, unless they managed to get their hands on a thermonuclear device, has a blast radius and damage area of: (all distances are in Kilometers)


    If they got a bigger weapon, highly unlikely, but let's say a tactical nuke, top end 200kt.



    As you can see, most of the base would survive, and reality check is even a strike at the heart of the base wouldn't be as catastrophic as you made out.

    However an air burst might be able to achieve near that sort of devastation:

    Nuclear Explosion Facts

    I'm not saying these numbers are solid, after all it's a geocities link, but it's good enough for this.

    It would be far easier to run a ship into Norfolk Harbor and really muck things up then to hit Ft. Hood.


    Here, just use Wiki, the actual effects are about the same. A slightly better source, but it's still Wiki, but the point still stands. To take out Ft. Hood you'd need an air burst, 200-500Kt, and if you want to do it right you use several.

    Better option would be to hit Norfolk, more densely packed, greater damage done.

    Effects of nuclear explosions - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

  5. #45
    Sage
    bhkad's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Last Seen
    08-13-10 @ 01:01 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    10,745

    Re: Commissioning of carrier George H.W. Bush to be held tomorrow

    Quote Originally Posted by MrVicchio View Post
    Here, just use Wiki, the actual effects are about the same. A slightly better source, but it's still Wiki, but the point still stands. To take out Ft. Hood you'd need an air burst, 200-500Kt, and if you want to do it right you use several.

    Better option would be to hit Norfolk, more densely packed, greater damage done.

    Effects of nuclear explosions - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
    Cargo ship sails from terrorist friendly port where it is loaded with the deadly cargo. Then it sails into Norfolk harbor and launches any kind of missile that can heft the weight of the nuclear device straight up. When it is at it's apogee the device is detonated.

    Simple.

    OBL 11/24/02

  6. #46
    Sage
    Renae's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    San Antonio Texas
    Last Seen
    10-23-17 @ 10:14 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    38,972
    Blog Entries
    15

    Re: Commissioning of carrier George H.W. Bush to be held tomorrow

    Quote Originally Posted by bhkad View Post
    Cargo ship sails from terrorist friendly port where it is loaded with the deadly cargo. Then it sails into Norfolk harbor and launches any kind of missile that can heft the weight of the nuclear device straight up. When it is at it's apogee the device is detonated.

    Simple.
    Yes and no.

    The problem is ensuring it actually detonates, and detonates where you want it too. That requires testing, weather to be right, and let's face it, that sort of care to weapons isn't a common factor with Terrorist.


    They prefer to KISS (Keep it Simple Stupid) their operations. 9/11 was almost an aberration in the complexity. One fool with a truck, pack or vest full of explosives.

    You REALLY want to get scared, and this is scary...

    Get a cargo ship, park it 20 NM off the US Coast, put a high end scud on it, and launch it for a ballistic arc say.. just over the center of Kansas at a height of 50 Miles over the earth.

    Yeah, that's not "easy" but certainly not beyond the realm of doable for say Iran, possibly NK though their ability is suspect.

    Warhead? One megaton or greater nuclear weapon. Effect? Nationwide EMP hit, most of our electric grid would be wiped out, most of our stuff, TV's, cars, phones, refrigerators... all dead.

    Actual physical damage none. Actual impact? It's 1892 again in America, and we ain't got that many horses.

  7. #47
    ANTI**ANTIFA
    ReverendHellh0und's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Temple of Solomon
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:52 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    75,580

    Re: Commissioning of carrier George H.W. Bush to be held tomorrow

    Quote Originally Posted by TheNextEra View Post
    Conservative legislators didn't seem to have a problem criticizing Clinton and Kosovo, and I don't remember an over outcry from conservatives criticizing them.

    Amazing that.



    I don't recall yours either.
    Let evil swiftly befall those who have wrongly condemned us

  8. #48
    Equal Opportunity Hater
    obvious Child's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    0.0, -2.3 on the Political Compass
    Last Seen
    12-09-14 @ 11:36 PM
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    19,883

    Re: Commissioning of carrier George H.W. Bush to be held tomorrow

    Quote Originally Posted by MrVicchio View Post
    A 20 kiloton nuclear weapon, which would be the TOP end of a terrorist weapon, unless they managed to get their hands on a thermonuclear device, has a blast radius and damage area of: (all distances are in Kilometers)
    That depends where they use it. Hitting largely the barracks area would do much of the damage. Furthermore the radiation after the explosion would kill for quite some time after. Many of the deaths from the Nagasaki and Hiroshima bombs came from radiation sickness, not the actual blast.

    As you can see, most of the base would survive, and reality check is even a strike at the heart of the base wouldn't be as catastrophic as you made out.
    What makes you think they wouldn't hit the areas with the largest populations?

    You do realize much of land on bases is largely devoid of humans for the most part? Plus you discount the radiation. This isn't a regular explosive.

    It would be far easier to run a ship into Norfolk Harbor and really muck things up then to hit Ft. Hood.
    Not really. Relatively few ships are worked on at any one time and major overhauls are rarely done with more then a skeleton crew. While they would definitely shut down the port, the loss of essentially equipment with small numbers of service personnel wouldn't be that bad. When was the last time a large number of naval assets were all being worked on at any one time in a major port?
    "If your opponent is of choleric temperament, seek to irritate him." - Sun Tzu

Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst ... 345

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •