5 ms·
> EDIT: Bigger bombs could be made, but the question of "how to deliver" the weapon to our enemies becomes a significant question. There's always the Dr. Strang
by handrous 5y ago
> EDIT: Bigger bombs could be made, but the question of "how to deliver" the weapon to our enemies becomes a significant question. There's always the Dr. Strangelove approach of building an infinitely huge bomb in your own country, and hoping the bomb is big enough to blow up the world... but that was a joke / sarcastic movie and not an actual plan (I hope).
I could absolutely see a country planting too-big-to-drop nukes along potential invasion routes. Especially during the Cold War, but even now.
- dragontamer 5y agoNuclear artillery did the job just fine though. When you have a gun that can deliver nukes 50km away (ie: standard M777 Howitzer), it makes more sense to shoot the nuke at the enemy rather than plant a bomb in an expected path. That way, you remain flexible. Artillery guns like the M777 can be fired roughly 10-times per minute (depending on the skill of its crew). Give them nuclear rounds, and they'll deliver. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_artillery https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_artillery
- handrous 5y agoSure, but heavy artillery might not survive a loss of air superiority over "friendly" territory. A deep-buried super-heavy nuke does, and forces the invaders to slow down and try to deal with it while using other, worse routes that aren't in its blast radius, or else risk having it go off at a very inconvenient time. Like the ultimate scorched-earth plan.
- dredmorbius 5y agoA chief function of mines isn't so much where they are as where they aren't, but that the enemy thinks they might be. Navigating minefields takes either time, a total disregard for consequence, or ignorance. None are especially effective countermeasures in heat of battle.
- moffkalast 5y agoAssuming your naval gun doesn't misfire and delete your ship.
- openasocket 5y agoA nuclear land mine was deployed by the US: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medium_Atomic_Demolition_Munition https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medium_Atomic_Demolition_Munit... . Not actually high yield, apparently only up to 15 kilotons. I could see it being useful to blunt an attack, and small enough that you could easily deploy them during a conflict and not have to deal with the political considerations of pre-positioning them. And unlike other tactical nuclear weapons it isn't really possible to intercept them. I could definitely see the DPRK deploying something like this to delay an invasion.
- ceejayoz 5y agoI remain fascinated by the W54, a nuclear weapon that has a carry bag. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/W54 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/W54
- dragontamer 5y agoDavy Crockett nuke was a point-and-shoot rocket launcher. A bag makes some semblance of sense: you are intending to run away before the bag goes off. That's not the case with Davy Crocket: you almost certainly will be exposed to the radiation. EDIT: Hah. Apparently the Davy Crockett used that W54 you were talking about as the warhead.
- ethbr0 5y agoIt's not overly linked on Wikipedia, but apparently the Green Light teams were the intended delivery method of tactical nukes in the late 50s / early 60s. Haul a nuclear backpack in, bury it, set the timer / unroll a cable, and then evacuate (optional) and detonate. Pretty crazy stuff. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_Light_Teams https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_Light_Teams
- totetsu 5y agoNow I want one of these bags as my daypack.
- sbierwagen 5y ago
- Symmetry 5y agoOr pack it in cobalt to produce optimally deadly fallout and kill everyone when you detonate it.