Super Nuke, Satan 2 revealed today

Obama removed all our MIRVs. We only have single warhead missiles.

a reply to: kamatty

The moon.
India did it.

a reply to: kamatty

History and math.

a reply to: kamatty

Computer simulations.

a reply to: kamatty

oh simple... they used an area on the backside of the moon.

How coukd a single 40 megaton blast possibly wipe out an area the size of Texas or the UK?

What a load of hype!

a reply to: Deny Arrogance

There was physical damage recorded over 600 miles from ground zero of the Tsar Bomba detonation, at 50 megatons.

But the RS-28 carries 10 heavy, or 15 smaller warheads. How does that much payload not destroy an area the size of Texas?

a reply to: Slamminuk

Thats basically a death star. That could kill the planet.

If it goes down I'm taking my family very far north where we will survive with gardens, moose and fish .

Hopefully not living in a city will give us a Headstart and a chance to survive.

I have a feeling my kids will have a very different life then I have had.

a reply to: GoShredAK

Imagine a meteor hitting earth and displacing all the surface dirt in Texas. The weather would change, radiation would reach every corner and I imagine it could even affect the earths rotation depending on where it is set off. It could trigger seismic activity if set off at a fault line.

Thats ALOT of explosive power.

a reply to: Greggers

that would be MAD...

a reply to: Slamminuk

Thanks for sharing, its kinda scary these super powers waving their nukes around, not giving a dam about us ordinary folk. The dick comparisons need to stop now ffs!!!

Oh and OP, your first link worked fine but the other 2 dont lead to anything?

The W88 also contains tritium, which has a half life of only 12.32 years and must be repeatedly replaced.[52] If these stories are true, it would explain the reported higher yield of the W88, 475 kilotons, compared with only 300 kilotons for the earlier W87 warhead.

Wikipedia - Thermonuclear Weapon

Man this is interesting stuff to read on. Learned some new terms (esp. 'secret' and 'born secret') and I am way off on the yields of current huge weapons! I had posted 50 KT but they have single warheads pushing out 475 KT. Geesh, when is enough. enough?

Fission bombs (A-bombs), after Japan, were first "boosted" by adding fusion pellets to create more neutrons to burn the fission material better. Then they developed fusion bomb. Most of the actual workings are still classified and have not been published or photographed. What is known is on wiki with a bunch of speculation. Like the "reported higher yield of 475 KT" which may not even be correct!

Most of the radiation is caused by the air being ionized. Since they are exploded above the surface any dirt thrown up is what is also irradiated. And yeah, that would suck. Glad I live near a military base to just get it over and done with.

a reply to: kamatty

They've tested similar yield weapons in the past.

originally posted by: ColdWisdom
a reply to: Slamminuk

So what happened to Satan 1?

He was reelected President, swapping positions with Medvedev.

Also wasnt this topic covered a few months back?

Is the US secret weapon kinetic bombardment?

I don't see how we don't have that. It would be the ultimate high ground advantage, totally unstoppable and undetectable. The attack could just be played off as an asteroid strike.

a reply to: GoShredAK

Kinetic Bombardment is overrated. If it's not damn near perfect, it's going to wobble and go God knows where. The effects aren't like in the movies either. There are better options.

a reply to: Slamminuk


The last time they let one of those off it blew the satelites to smithereens, and punched a hole in the atmosphere.The then Soviets thought they were to much trouble.

a reply to: Slamminuk


The last time they let one of those off it blew the satelites to smithereens, and punched a hole in the atmosphere.The then Soviets thought they were to much trouble.

a reply to: Zaphod58

Space based options?