Model Boat Mayhem

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length.
Pages: 1 [2]   Go Down

Author Topic: Nuclear Weapons  (Read 8704 times)

html

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 317
  • Location: Chingford, East London
Re: Nuclear Weapons
« Reply #25 on: December 24, 2015, 08:48:45 PM »

A few years ago when holidaying in Las Vegas we went up into the mountains and saw the underground nuclear test sites. I was told that from the vantage point a lot of bigwigs would watch the big bang, knowing they were safe as the wind was always behind them so it blew the fallout towards Utah and Salt Lake City. That is why apparently that city has the highest rates of any type of cancer in the entire USA.

Brian
Logged
I do not suffer insanity, I quite like it!

TomHugill

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 532
  • Model Boat Mayhem is Great!
  • Location: Manchester
Re: Nuclear Weapons
« Reply #26 on: December 24, 2015, 08:49:12 PM »

During our 75th Naval Celebrations, BB63 entered Sydney harbour & tied up at my place of work :-X.......the anti-nuke brigade made their usual rubber duckie protest against that vessels reported nuclear powered propulsion system [which was naturally oil fired boilers & steam turbines]

To add insult to injury, a helo pilot from HMS Illustrious  %) hovered over the protesters at the bow of the 'Might Mo' & blew them away toward the harbour bridge  {-)

Little did they realise that tied up at the Loo, was a 4000 something tonne RN Frigate with nuclear tipped projectiles for her pop gun  O0

Not surprisingly, that fact never made the press release or TV news.......... Derek

Didn't the Missouri have nuclear tipped cruise missiles in her armorment?
Logged

derekwarner

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8,142
  • Location: Wollongong Australia
Re: Nuclear Weapons
« Reply #27 on: December 24, 2015, 09:15:19 PM »

Hullo Tom.....I understood, that for her attendance with the 75th celebrations...she was armed with conventional weapons only

Conventional 16" projectiles were only for fun {-), however multi cell Harpoon and Cruise missiles  <*< and four Rayathon Phalanx gatling guns  >>:-( would be enough to deter any dingbat even from over the horizon.... Derek
Logged
Derek Warner

Honorary Secretary [Retired]
Illawarra Live Steamers Co-op
Australia
www.ils.org.au

dodes

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 657
  • Location: Hampshire
Re: Nuclear Weapons
« Reply #28 on: December 24, 2015, 10:32:30 PM »

The old Leander's when fairly new used to carry nuclear depth charges for use against deep subs. Because below a certain depth conventional weapons were ineffective due to water pressure. 
Logged

Crossie

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 234
  • Model Boat Mayhem is Great!
  • Location: Norfolk UK
Re: Nuclear Weapons
« Reply #29 on: December 24, 2015, 11:33:45 PM »

Spain and the US have recently agreed a compensation deal over the Palomares incident. Apart from a lot of money changing hands, the US has agreed to clear many 1000's of tons of earth and other detritus from Spain back to the US for 'decontamination' Wonder why they waited 40 years?

Does anyone remember the protect and survive instructional films from the 50s/60s? How to build shelters in your homes? That had nothing to do with protection. Some bright spark in Whitehall realised that a country littered with millions of corpses would not be good for the health of those that did survive. SO why not invent a scheme that urged people to bury themselves?

Sounds remarkable now, but for somebody to be so callous and insular to come up with a scheme like that makes you sit and think what governments really think of their people.

        Not really callous at all, such a scheme is simply logical. It is Government's task to govern, and that means at all times and under all conditions, and after a nuclear exchange the usual societal functions would cease to exist so such a scheme would reduce the burden on (any!) survivors. It is strange that this subject should arise here, and many (older) readers may remember the BBC film dealing with this subject which had its final scenes on a Christmas Day,  The War Game <:( a 1965 drama made by our illustrious BBC, but considered by the then government to be too dangerous to broadcast until many years later . So with that bleak memory may I wish everyone a Peaceful and Joyous Christmas and good luck for 2016

                                                                                         Trevor
       
Logged

Jerry C

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1,110
  • Location: Caernarfon, North Wales.
Re: Nuclear Weapons
« Reply #30 on: December 25, 2015, 02:36:55 AM »

Never mind atomic weapons, I've just been Nerfed to death by grandkids and old kids.
Jerry. In Oz.

tigertiger

  • Global Moderator
  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7,093
  • Location: Kunming, city of eternal springtime, SW China.
Re: Nuclear Weapons
« Reply #31 on: December 25, 2015, 02:58:42 AM »

Logged
The only stupid question is the one I didn't ask

raflaunches

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2,703
  • The Penguins are coming!!!
  • Location: Back in the UK, Kettering, Northants
Re: Nuclear Weapons
« Reply #32 on: December 25, 2015, 06:31:50 AM »

I remember a few years ago the British Government declassified the footage about Nuclear survival ( the real one) that all military personnel were forced to watch in training. I was approached in the pub by a non military person who had believed all the government safety information about building a nuclear bunker in their garden and living underground for a few weeks then emerging after the radiation had 'dispersed'!
Oh we would all be safe and carry on to rebuild after a month he said, my Dad and I looked at each other in utter disbelief when we mentioned that it would be at least a couple of years before he could leave the bunker. He was shocked! His filter for his breathing system and his water supply were outside his bunker and had to be changed every four days!
Logged
Nick B

Help! The penguins have stolen my sanity, and my hot water bottle!

Illegitimi non carborundum!

Allnightin

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 203
Re: Nuclear Weapons
« Reply #33 on: December 25, 2015, 09:54:27 AM »

Little did they realise that tied up at the Loo, was a 4000 something tonne RN Frigate with nuclear tipped projectiles for her pop gun  O0


Sorry to spoil a good dit but the RN 4.5" gun (Mk 6 or Mk 8 variety) never had anything but conventional HE rounds.  In the Cold War era some RN ships carried the "600 lb" bomb which was a Nuclear Depth Charge variant of the WE177 bomb.
Logged

boneash

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 187
  • In an actual war zone there are 2 types of ships,
  • Location: Kent UK
Re: Nuclear Weapons
« Reply #34 on: December 25, 2015, 10:16:59 AM »

Maybe there was a use of DU, depleted uranium, which is "slightly " radioactive. But then so is Perrier water too and Brazil nuts !!
DU was definitely used in smaller rounds as being heavier than lead and flammable when used as armour piercing is quite effective against tanks and maybe ships too..
Logged

derekwarner

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8,142
  • Location: Wollongong Australia
Re: Nuclear Weapons
« Reply #35 on: December 25, 2015, 10:39:54 AM »

The vessel I referenced was the HMS Manchester [D95]......she with HMS Beaver and HMS Amazon accompanied the Illustrious to the Australian 75th Fleet review in 1986

During this political period, our Australian Labour Government decreed an embargo against any vessel with any reference to nuclear capability or power.....this is clearly distinct to when an earlier Australian Liberal Government welcomed the nuclear powered USS Enterprise to anchor in Sydney harbour

From this in 1986, I do not expect that the RN would have even suggested or admitted that any of her Naval vessels carried NT projectiles for her 4.5" MK8 mounting

Just reading now with the comment from boneash......apologies....I stand corrected .......yes DUT ......as used in the Falklands .... Derek
 
Logged
Derek Warner

Honorary Secretary [Retired]
Illawarra Live Steamers Co-op
Australia
www.ils.org.au

Jerry C

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1,110
  • Location: Caernarfon, North Wales.
Re: Nuclear Weapons
« Reply #36 on: December 25, 2015, 10:55:51 AM »

NDB, 600lbs of instant sunshine!
Jerry.

Allnightin

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 203
Re: Nuclear Weapons
« Reply #37 on: December 25, 2015, 05:31:10 PM »

From this in 1986, I do not expect that the RN would have even suggested or admitted that any of her Naval vessels carried NT projectiles for her 4.5" MK8 mounting

Just reading now with the comment from boneash......apologies....I stand corrected .......yes DUT ......as used in the Falklands .... Derek

Just to be clear, the 4.5" Mk 8 had High Explosive, Starshell and Chaff operational rounds in the mid 80s plus AA Practice and Surface Practice rounds for exercise firings plus a ram round for ammunition handling and that was it.  If "NT" is meant to be Nuclear Tipped, there was never any such animal.

Depleted Uranium rounds might have been an issue for a visit to Sydney if Manchester had had her Phalanx fit by then but because of the potential toxic effect on the environment rather than anything to do with nuclear weapons.  Phalanx was fitted after the Falklands war to Type 42s but was too heavy for frigates like the Type 21s. 
Logged

RAAArtyGunner

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3,852
  • Location: Brisbane, Australia
Re: Nuclear Weapons, flawed thinking
« Reply #38 on: December 25, 2015, 10:28:09 PM »

I remember a few years ago the British Government declassified the footage about Nuclear survival ( the real one) that all military personnel were forced to watch in training. I was approached in the pub by a non military person who had believed all the government safety information about building a nuclear bunker in their garden and living underground for a few weeks then emerging after the radiation had 'dispersed'!
Oh we would all be safe and carry on to rebuild after a month he said, my Dad and I looked at each other in utter disbelief when we mentioned that it would be at least a couple of years before he could leave the bunker. He was shocked! His filter for his breathing system and his water supply were outside his bunker and had to be changed every four days!

On a similar parallel, in the 50's the Australian Army was screening training films of actual nuclear test explosions. These indicated that troops standing with their backs to the explosion would wait a couple of minutes for the blast to pass. Being at a "safe" distance, they would then turn around and could then occupy the ground from the bombed enemy.

Logged
Gunna build those other boats one day.

essex2visuvesi

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6,146
  • Location: Finland, England, Finland!
Re: Nuclear Weapons
« Reply #39 on: December 26, 2015, 08:25:02 AM »

I remember a few years ago the British Government declassified the footage about Nuclear survival ( the real one) that all military personnel were forced to watch in training. I was approached in the pub by a non military person who had believed all the government safety information about building a nuclear bunker in their garden and living underground for a few weeks then emerging after the radiation had 'dispersed'!
Oh we would all be safe and carry on to rebuild after a month he said, my Dad and I looked at each other in utter disbelief when we mentioned that it would be at least a couple of years before he could leave the bunker. He was shocked! His filter for his breathing system and his water supply were outside his bunker and had to be changed every four days!


Reminds me of an episode of only fools and horses, when they calculated the number of batteries they would need to run the air purifier
Logged
One By One The Penguins Steal My Sanity
Proud member of the OAM  (Order of the Armchair Modeller)
Junior member of the OGG  (Order of the Grumpy Git)

Tug Fanatic

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1,477
  • Location: England
Re: Nuclear Weapons, flawed thinking
« Reply #40 on: December 26, 2015, 08:58:23 AM »

On a similar parallel, in the 50's the Australian Army was screening training films of actual nuclear test explosions. These indicated that troops standing with their backs to the explosion would wait a couple of minutes for the blast to pass. Being at a "safe" distance, they would then turn around and could then occupy the ground from the bombed enemy.

I guess to the military mind you are trying to ensure that your troops will do as ordered and recognise that any engagement has acceptable casualty levels. To the rest of us it doesn't sound quite so sensible.
Logged

Nemo

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1,866
  • Location: Sussex.
Re: Nuclear Weapons
« Reply #41 on: December 27, 2015, 01:39:59 PM »

A Christmas Island veteran before me remembered being blown off the top of a 3 ton truck by the blast, despite being told that the blast wave would not get close to the island!
I recall wandering over ground zero in flip-flops only months after the final test, there being nothing to stop me or warn me of any residual danger. My sons still talk of my feet glowing in the dark however. Obviously, I am still here over 50 years later!
Logged

Umi_Ryuzuki

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1,142
  • Location: PDX, OR USA
    • Models and Miniatures
Re: Nuclear Weapons
« Reply #42 on: December 27, 2015, 07:23:56 PM »

A friend of mine participated in a study that went to the Bikini Atoll in 2008.
The mission was supported by Paul Allen, so their research ship was the M/Y Octopus.
Mike was one of the submarine dive crew for the Pagoo submersible.
One of the findings the researchers found was that, despite the relatively low levels of
radiation around the atoll, and lagoon, any foods grown on the atoll were heavily contaminated with cesium. 


 {:-{

dodes

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 657
  • Location: Hampshire
Re: Nuclear Weapons
« Reply #43 on: December 28, 2015, 07:27:20 PM »

When on the RMAS NAV's ( 1993/99 ), carried most ammunition used in the MoD, the only nukes carried where the warheads for the prime weapon (Polaris and Triton) and a freight out to the Aegean sea for the RFA which composed of spent uranium tipped 30mm rounds (during the Kosovo War ).
Logged
Pages: 1 [2]   Go Up