+ Reply to Thread
Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 44
  1. #21
    Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Ponce P.R
    Posts
    190
    Quote Originally Posted by Kibblehouse View Post
    One think not mentioned is the high probability that the Votan ships would be able to shoot down, detonate, or re-direct the missles before they got close enough to be a threat. Even if the ships were "non-military" when planning for a 5000 year trip you'd include some measures to deflect or destroy space debris.

    If you could get an ICBM close to the ship, yes I think you could do some decent damage, although your lethal radius would be alot smaller than when in atmosphere. A contact hit i believe would still cause significant damage.

    However, throwing in another monkey wrench into the discussion.... Shields. Since all the grunts on the ground have some kind of shielding(quite effective in the case of dark matter). One would logicaly assume that ships prepared for a 5000 year space journey would have them too. How much damage they would absorb/deflect would have to be based on a guess at how strong they would be, and how effective they would be against a thermo-nuke.

    Expert? No, just throwing my 2 script in like everyone else.
    yes shields, protection against the radiation in inter stellar space among other things have to be taken into account. I mean even if you could target a ship in space with an ICBM it is not an stationary target and is not only moving but can change course or alter it's orbit or even head back a a bit farther into interplanetary space in the solar system itself. but what really irks me is how can anyone be so monumentally stupid as to say that ICBMs are impossible to detect from space when both sides relied on satellites in space to detect any launch from either side Mudturtle must be doing some heavy drugs or something like that to make such an outrageous claim, because is right there with the Flat Earth society.

  2. #22
    Member Mudturtle Jones's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Dayton, Ohio
    Posts
    313
    ATTENTION:

    To everyone living in the Putzmeister, sorry Punkmeister universe; nuclear weapons will not be of any use against orbiting spaceships. This has been decreed by the Putzmeister himself. Disagreement will be met with insults and questions about self-gratification.

    To everyone concerned with the Defiance universe, it doesn't matter because when the Votans arrived, there was no battle between their ships are Earth's forces.

    To anyone who cares about the actual universe, it depends on the capabilities of the ships.

  3. #23
    Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Ponce P.R
    Posts
    190
    Quote Originally Posted by Mudturtle Jones View Post
    ATTENTION:

    To everyone living in the Putzmeister, sorry Punkmeister universe; nuclear weapons will not be of any use against orbiting spaceships. This has been decreed by the Putzmeister himself. Disagreement will be met with insults and questions about self-gratification.

    To everyone concerned with the Defiance universe, it doesn't matter because when the Votans arrived, there was no battle between their ships are Earth's forces.

    To anyone who cares about the actual universe, it depends on the capabilities of the ships.
    You are the one that said that ICBMs are impossible to detect from space which is a load of crap and that's a fact in the real world not that imagined one of yours.

  4. #24
    Member Mudturtle Jones's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Dayton, Ohio
    Posts
    313
    Quote Originally Posted by PunkMaister View Post
    You are the one that said that ICBMs are impossible to detect from space which is a load of crap and that's a fact in the real world not that imagined one of yours.
    Punky, Punky, Punky,
    I'm sorry if I upset you. I thought that as a self professed fool you would appreciate my little attempt at humor. However, I never said ICBM's would be impossible to detectcfrom space, I said the warheads would be difficult to detect. Apparently you still don't understand the difference between the missile and the warheads. You're correct that Norad could detect the missile launch but once the missile flew into space (that's how they work), and released the MIRV's, it was difficult to track the warheads. There being several of them and each being much smaller than the missile.
    Sort of like someone firing a shotgun at you. You would see the blast from the gun but wouldn't be able to see the shot coming at you.

  5. #25
    Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Ponce P.R
    Posts
    190
    Quote Originally Posted by Mudturtle Jones View Post
    Punky, Punky, Punky,
    I'm sorry if I upset you. I thought that as a self professed fool you would appreciate my little attempt at humor. However, I never said ICBM's would be impossible to detectcfrom space, I said the warheads would be difficult to detect. Apparently you still don't understand the difference between the missile and the warheads. You're correct that Norad could detect the missile launch but once the missile flew into space (that's how they work), and released the MIRV's, it was difficult to track the warheads. There being several of them and each being much smaller than the missile.
    Sort of like someone firing a shotgun at you. You would see the blast from the gun but wouldn't be able to see the shot coming at you.
    Oh but I do it is you who do not understand that the warheads themselves do not have any kind of propulsion other than gravity once the missile deploys them so MRVs would not work against orbiting ships at all as they are designed to fall back to Earth and detonate not track and hit an object in space, And the point still is that the Votans would have known who launched at them the moment the rockets fired and would have replied in kind.

  6. #26
    PunkMaster, you are partially correct and incorrect.

    High-altitude nuclear explosion (HANE) tests prior to the bans agreed to in the 60s showed nuclear weapons detonated in low-earth orbit are destructive. The Starfish Prime test on 9 July 1962 detonated a 1.4 megaton warhead at an altitude of 400km (the median of ISS's orbit, by the way). This explosion caused heat which could be felt by the technicians at the launch site (Johnson Atoll in the South Pacific), intense light (enough to cause retinal burns in two techs who did not wear their goggles), radiation which destroyed or damaged six satellites (Ariel, TRAAC, and Transit 4B were destroyed; Cosmos V, In jun 1, and Telestar 1 were damaged), and an EMP which damaged electronics from Hawai'i to New Zealand. Source Source Source

    So, while the shock-wave would not be a problem (as it doesn't exist), the heat (if close enough), the radiation (ionized neutrinos can kill living flesh even inside shielded systems), and the EMP could be destructive IF the Arks were not hardened against EMP. It is plausable they did not harden against weaponized EMP as this is not something found in nature (high-energy, short pulse, narrow band from an unnatural source as opposed to lower energy, longer waves, and broadband in natural sources). Also, the US's B41, built until 1976, was a 10 megaton bomb. Larger weapon means more destructive capabilities.

    As has been mentioned in other threads, the Arks were not warships, so they may not have been hardened against militarized EMP. We do the same with our satellites (military satellites are specifically hardened against radiation and EMP, but civilian satellites are only resistant to radiation and not hardened against EMP at all).

    So, the answer to this debate is not the effects of nuclear weapons detonated in space, but the defenses of the Arks themselves. This, however, is NOT something which has been mentioned.

    Edit: The language filter apparently finds the PROPER NAME of an one satellite offensive. Mods, I understand the word can be used as an offensive term, but In jun (without the space) is also the name of a series of satellites.
    Death before Dishonor -- Nothing before Coffee
    Nihil curo de ista tua stulta superstitione.

    XBL: Deirachel IGN: Deirachel Kazhilezwo(XBox-NA) Clan: BuSab

    Follow Capt. Masticate's Captivity Log on Twitter.

  7. #27
    Member Mudturtle Jones's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Dayton, Ohio
    Posts
    313
    Quote Originally Posted by PunkMaister View Post
    Oh but I do it is you who do not understand that the warheads themselves do not have any kind of propulsion other than gravity once the missile deploys them so MRVs would not work against orbiting ships at all as they are designed to fall back to Earth and detonate not track and hit an object in space, And the point still is that the Votans would have known who launched at them the moment the rockets fired and would have replied in kind.
    Bullets have no propulsion systems either but can still be used to hit a target. The missile would be programmed not to do it's pitch-over and fire the warheads at the ship. The Votans would probably be more concerned with the incoming attack and not immediate retaliation. Like Deirachel said, we don't know what the Votan ship are capable of so this argument is moot.

    As far as known technology goes, the answer to your question is yes. A nuke would be an effective weapon against an alien spacecraft.

  8. #28
    Member Dandrielas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    2,103
    Wouldn't an orbital rail-gun be more effective then a nuke? With the advancement rate they are going, I am sure one with the punch of a nuke can be developed. Not to mention it will be easier to aim.
    The clock goes round and round.
    Where it goes nobody knows.
    Except those few who don't try and loose.
    The clock keeps ticking as fortune glooms.
    Fore those who are loose with what they choose.
    The clock keeps ticking over those bafoons while the watchful eye always looms.



  9. #29
    Member Mudturtle Jones's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Dayton, Ohio
    Posts
    313
    Quote Originally Posted by Dandrielas View Post
    Wouldn't an orbital rail-gun be more effective then a nuke? With the advancement rate they are going, I am sure one with the punch of a nuke can be developed. Not to mention it will be easier to aim.
    Probably, but the original question was about the effectiveness of a nuke. I've only been discussing stuff I know about, which is dated to say the least. I haven't kept up with rail-gun progress though I understand the theory.

    Punkmeister doesn't want to believe that anything Earth had would be a match for the Votans even though they had 13 years to prepare for their arrival.

  10. #30
    Member Dandrielas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    2,103
    Quote Originally Posted by Mudturtle Jones View Post
    Probably, but the original question was about the effectiveness of a nuke. I've only been discussing stuff I know about, which is dated to say the least. I haven't kept up with rail-gun progress though I understand the theory.

    Punkmeister doesn't want to believe that anything Earth had would be a match for the Votans even though they had 13 years to prepare for their arrival.
    I disagree with him in that regard. In that 13 year wait, they could have sped up the process on Nuke delivery and rail-gun technology. In fact, the rail-gun would be more effective in space due to lack of atmosphere. The kinetic energy upon impact would be more than enough to puncture bulkheads and shielding.
    The clock goes round and round.
    Where it goes nobody knows.
    Except those few who don't try and loose.
    The clock keeps ticking as fortune glooms.
    Fore those who are loose with what they choose.
    The clock keeps ticking over those bafoons while the watchful eye always looms.



Posting Permissions

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