Could a nuclear bomb be delivered and detonated via a truck or boat?
-
This post did not contain any content.wrote last edited by [email protected]
yes, have you played RA2 before, believe one of the soviet factions used a nuclear bomb truck as a unit(you amass a large number of them and use iron curtain or chronosphere), i assume thats also IRL too, in different version. the yield wouldnt be very high, compared warheads, or even bombs though.
-
This is something that USA has discussed and there may be radiation sensors installed in and around major cities to prevent this.
i assume for a truck you can shield the radiation with lead walls, or insulating materials.
-
Yes, but at this point it would be cheaper and quicker to have spacex fly to orbit, capture a 5 ton rock and drop it on a city.
There's a reason Iran has been 'weeks' from making a bomb for decades now.
wrote last edited by [email protected]That would be a really shitty nuke. Like around 10% of a Davy Crockett.
-
i assume for a truck you can shield the radiation with lead walls, or insulating materials.
I figure it is possible. I don't know how much lead shielding is required, and a semi could probably haul it just fine.
That being said, one will most likely still give themselves away. Contamination is a thing, and I don't know how one would build and load that massive weight in secret.
-
That would be a really shitty nuke. Like around 10% of a Davy Crockett.
Use a bigger rock. I might change the cost by hundreds of millions, and still be less than the billions in development and production for a nuke.
-
Use a bigger rock. I might change the cost by hundreds of millions, and still be less than the billions in development and production for a nuke.
wrote last edited by [email protected]Where do you get these rocks though? There is actually a similar concept that uses tungsten rods instead of rocks.
But the entire thing isn't really practical. If you want the ability to strike any place on earth in a reasonable time, you'd to have hundreds of tungsten rod equipped satellites (or rocks with rocket engines attached to them) in orbit at the same time.
I'm not sure it would actually be cheaper than just using nukes on ballistic missiles.
-
Where do you get these rocks though? There is actually a similar concept that uses tungsten rods instead of rocks.
But the entire thing isn't really practical. If you want the ability to strike any place on earth in a reasonable time, you'd to have hundreds of tungsten rod equipped satellites (or rocks with rocket engines attached to them) in orbit at the same time.
I'm not sure it would actually be cheaper than just using nukes on ballistic missiles.
The expense of a delivering the nuke is negligible in comparison to the cost and effort of building a nuke. So much so, that large rocks are more economical than building a nuke at this point.
-
The expense of a delivering the nuke is negligible in comparison to the cost and effort of building a nuke. So much so, that large rocks are more economical than building a nuke at this point.
wrote last edited by [email protected]Building nukes isn't that expensive. The most expensive part is probably building the enrichment facilities, but that's a one-time investment. Once you have all the material, a nuke isn't that complicated to build. A bunch of students basically designed one that was deemed to be functional.
On the other hand, launching hundreds, possibly thousands of multi-ton projectiles into orbit is extremely expensive. And of course you have to maintain them in space somehow, possibly for decades. Either that or you have to de-orbit and replace them, which would mean regularly bombarding the ocean or some desert ...
It's just not practical. Even if it was I highly doubt it would be cheaper.