New Nuclear Technology Virus

Status
Not open for further replies.
Of course. but then whats the point of having the nuclear codes and your finger on the button if you cant precipitate a nuclear conflict over wifi using your iphone.

Thermonuclear holocaust? There's an app for that.

It's a shame they can't harness this nuclear power and shoot all the RS into space..

There's something about a big red button with a "do not push" sign, that makes me want to push it.

There's no app, just checked, but you can turn your iPhone camera into night vision.
 

Well, I don't know about all of this, but I remember some git hacked GOT.

If someone can get past our creaky gates, it can happen to anyone.
 
http://uk.news.yahoo.com/5/20100929/twl-hackers-unleash-worm-that-damages-re-3fd0ae9.html

The frightening thing about this article on a conjectured israeli virus isn't that these viruses lie dormant on nuclear computers. Its that nuclear computers run ******* windows.

Jesus, find a safer platform than that. An apple mac, a feckin spectrum.

And before I start a mac vs pc thing, let me say that all computers are [Poor language removed], I aint gonna argue one over the other except when it comes to viruses and malware. The argument that because PC's run 90% of the worlds computer so therefore they get the majority of the attention from hackers is bogus as well. Not one significant virus in fifteen years of mac's. Surely someone out there is trying. Of course they are, the system is inherently stronger against malware.

Hope the nuclear missiles aren't sitting on a computer running vista.

*goes back to bed and hides under duvet.

The good news is they aren't! The bad (or good news, depends on how you look at it) all the stuff we use for shooting Nuclear missiles is time tested cream of the 1960's and 1970's tech. All very durable, able to withstand shock and hardship, and somewhat shielded from EMP.

Spoken from actual experience of being on a submarine that carried 24 Trident C-4 missiles (8 strategic deterrent patrols under my belt)
 
The good news is they aren't! The bad (or good news, depends on how you look at it) all the stuff we use for shooting Nuclear missiles is time tested cream of the 1960's and 1970's tech. All very durable, able to withstand shock and hardship, and somewhat shielded from EMP.

Spoken from actual experience of being on a submarine that carried 24 Trident C-4 missiles (8 strategic deterrent patrols under my belt)

HEAD FOR THE BUNKERS!
 

The good news is they aren't! The bad (or good news, depends on how you look at it) all the stuff we use for shooting Nuclear missiles is time tested cream of the 1960's and 1970's tech. All very durable, able to withstand shock and hardship, and somewhat shielded from EMP.

Spoken from actual experience of being on a submarine that carried 24 Trident C-4 missiles (8 strategic deterrent patrols under my belt)

That puts paid to half the narratives of dime store novels and EMP's rendering the world defenceless. Somehow I feel really comforted that most nuclear missiles aint on modern systems.

1970s-comp-18-464x280.jpg


You can't play Doom on it but you could destroy the eastern seaboard of the United States, or redecorate Iran with extreme prejudice.
 
Well, it is all old-school machines that take up whole rooms. Very little software to be infected, and lots of hardware with old-fashioned real switches and real interlocks. Even the missiles themselves have little in the way of software to run (don't get me wrong, there is software in there, but it is all isolated and nothing is interconnected).

Basically you tell the missiles where they are in the world (that was my job, btw, Strategic navigation), give them coordinates to fly too and then when it launches it takes a shot of the stars to verify its position in the world and then it does its thing. And to prove we can still do it, a boat launches every year down off of Cape Canaveral (and duh, no warheads on it ;) )
 
For viewing pleasure......a Trident missile launch

[video=youtube;fl37UZvFsz0]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fl37UZvFsz0&feature=fvw[/video]

And for more coolness...here is a launch of the Trident II D-5 missile while it was being developed (test launch goes bad!)

[video=youtube;OkT3I6RDPkw]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OkT3I6RDPkw&feature=related[/video]
 
Cheers Dylan. The links to those videos just turned me into Chico in the presence of Arteta

This one. OOOUFFFFFF!!!!

[video=youtube;l4keFhw5230]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l4keFhw5230[/video]


Nuke em D/D !
 

Detonation compilations

[video=youtube;hv09zUQ50f0]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hv09zUQ50f0&feature=related[/video]

This one above gets really neat at about 3:20 in, when the music stops.

And the biggest weapon ever detonated....almost 60 MegaTons. To put that in perspective, my sub carried missiles with warheads in the 80 kT range (equivalent of 80,000 tons of TNT). This is 57 MT (57,000,000 tons). Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombs ranged from 13-18 kT.

[video=youtube;LxD44HO8dNQ]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LxD44HO8dNQ&feature=related[/video]

The info from the youtube page

October 30th 1961 - The Tsar Bomba, King of the Bombs, Царь-бомба or Big Ivan.

This footage is courtesy of the documentary "Trinity and Beyond", directed by Peter Kuran, and other footage is courtesy of the Discovery channel. The original footage was from declassified Soviet Archives. The music used is from The Planets Suite composed by Gustav Holst. The movement is 'Mars: the Bringer of War'

Before I get into the details of the test, I want to clear up something very important. The title of this video is "Tsar Bomba - King of the Bombs - 57,000,000 Tonnes of TNT". Understand now that this test wasn't the result of a detonation of 57,000,000 Tonnes of TNT, but rather the nuclear yield EQUIVALENT of a detonation of 57,000,000 Tonnes of Trinitrotoluene. The actual weight of the device was 27 tonnes. And coincidentally, one tonne is taken as a metric tonne, or 1000 kilograms - (2200lbs). All units used in physics are metric. The reason the yield equivalent system is used is because the energy released from the explosion of a set amount of TNT is a constant.

Second to that: I KNOW THE SCREENSHOTS AT THE END ARE OF THE CLOUD OVER THE GROUND. The reason I made a mistake was because when I made this video I was using a 6 year old CRT monitor with numerous problems, some of which with the shading. I greatly regret it butI cant be bothered removing/re-uploading the video again so Ill just live with it.

The bomb was designed as a 100 Megaton device, not a 50 Megaton device. This was due to its 3 stage design: fission-fusion-fusion. There is fission initiator that when detonated, begins a fusion reaction. Then there is a further fast-fission detonation (With neutrons from the second stage) of a Uranium-238 tamper which boosts the yield by 50 Megatons. For the test, the Tsar had its Uranium tamper replaced with lead to reduce the maximum yield by half (To 50 Megatons).

The blast yield was equal to that of a blast of 57,000,000 Tonnes of TNT....or to put that into context: The weight of 270 Empire State Buildings worth of TNT. This makes the Tsar the most powerful nuclear device ever detonated in history. Think of the destruction at Hiroshima. The Tsar was 3800 times more powerful than Hiroshima.

The bomb's weight was 27 tonnes, and its dimensions were: 8 meters (26ft) in length, and 2 meters (6.5ft) in diameter.

It was air-dropped, from a modified Tupolev Tu-95 Bear, and it used a nylon parachute to slow its decent to give the crew time to escape.

The bomb was dropped from an altitude of 34,500 feet AGL (10,500 meters), and it detonated a little over three minutes later at an altitude of 13,100 feet AGL (4,000 meters). In this time: The Tu-95, travelling at a ground speed of 480kts (552mph, 864kph), travelled into the safe zone (about 45km from ground zero) and was therefore 79km away from the blast.

When the bomb detonated, immediately the temperature directly below and surrounding the detonation would have risen to millions of degrees. The pressure below the blast was 300 pounds per square inch, ten times the pressure in a car tyre. The light energy released was so powerful that it was visible even at 1000km (621 miles), with cloudy skies. The shockwave was powerful enough to break windows at even up to 900 kilometres (560 miles) from the blast. The shockwave was recorded orbiting the earth 3 times. The mushroom cloud rose to an altitude of 64,000 meters (210,000 feet) before levelling out. The thermal energy from the blast was powerful that it could cause 3rd degree burns to a human standing 100 km (62 miles) away from the blast.

The radius of the fireball was 2.3 kilometres (1.4 miles). The blast radius (area in which total destruction ensured) was 13km (8 miles).

The most important thing to note is that this bomb was designed as a 100 Megaton device (Yield equivalent of 0.1 billion tonnes of TNT). If detonated, everything within a 48 kilometer (30 mile) diameter would be vaporised. Everything within a 195 kilometer (120 mile) diameter would be incinerated in a fireball. This would ensure total destruction of a large city like New York, Paris or London, as well as devastation on its outskirts.

Look at my other video to get more information about the test history.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Welcome

Join Grand Old Team to get involved in the Everton discussion. Signing up is quick, easy, and completely free.

Shop

Back
Top