Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.
2020/06/18 05:16:55
Subject: Re:Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction
Waiting for my shill money from Spiral Arm Studios
Nuclear weapon radiation returns to safe levels within 3-5 weeks. There is actually very little long term radiation danger from a nuclear weapon. Radiation is more of a concern if you are following up the bomb with a ground force.
Self-proclaimed evil Cat-person. Dues Ex Felines
Cato Sicarius, after force feeding Captain Ventris a copy of the Codex Astartes for having the audacity to play Deathwatch, chokes to death on his own D-baggery after finding Calgar assembling his new Eldar army.
Laughing Man wrote: That ten ton rod going at 3 km/s has 45 gigajoules of energy, which is pretty much all deposited directly into whatever it lands on.
The bolded part is the key takeaway, and what makes the rods worth it.
Nukes are pretty inefficient in terms of energy conversion. So much of their energy is converted into useless light and long term radiation instead of pure explosive force. Now maybe you want the area denial that the long term radiation gives, but generally it is not a desirable part of a nuke.
The rods are much more focused with their energy, which in theory makes them better against a hardened target like a deep underground bunker even if they have much less overall energy than a nuke. The rods can also still level cities if you want, and without that nasty radiation to worry about.
That's the thing though, that one megaton is the useful energy. There's a reason why the comparison is to tons of TNT. It's omnidirectional, sure, but when it's literally a million times more force than dropping a telephone pole from orbit, it doesn't terribly matter what direction it's going in.
As for what sort of damage a rod from god would do, a bomb of similar yield (the US military's M118s) clears forest for about 150 feet in every direction when detonated at ground level. A KKW is going to do a lot less, simply because it doesn't produce the same sort of overpressure wave that a bomb blast does, and deposits most of its energy directly into what it hits. Great for bunker busting, but likely to leave the building next door standing, if with a lot of broken windows, and probably cheaper to just drop a bomb designed for the same purpose on whatever you're aiming at.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/06/18 15:23:57
2020/06/18 19:36:51
Subject: Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction
Not to mention that you aren't "dropping" solid rods. These rods need to be in orbit and then need to have the means of exiting that orbit into a sub-orbital trajectory of the correct profile to hit whatever target you are aiming at. Your range of viable targets will be limited by the standing orbit of the rod and the available fuel to alter that orbit into a projectile trajectory.
You are effectively just storing missiles in space with all of the negatives that come from storing stuff in space.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/06/18 19:38:03
The Laws of Thermodynamics:
1) You cannot win. 2) You cannot break even. 3) You cannot stop playing the game.
Colonel Flagg wrote:You think you're real smart. But you're not smart; you're dumb. Very dumb. But you've met your match in me.
2020/06/18 21:38:15
Subject: Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction
A Town Called Malus wrote: Not to mention that you aren't "dropping" solid rods. These rods need to be in orbit and then need to have the means of exiting that orbit into a sub-orbital trajectory of the correct profile to hit whatever target you are aiming at. Your range of viable targets will be limited by the standing orbit of the rod and the available fuel to alter that orbit into a projectile trajectory.
You are effectively just storing missiles in space with all of the negatives that come from storing stuff in space.
Yep, without the warhead to boot.
2020/06/18 23:20:50
Subject: Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction
Laughing Man wrote: That ten ton rod going at 3 km/s has 45 gigajoules of energy, which is pretty much all deposited directly into whatever it lands on.
The bolded part is the key takeaway, and what makes the rods worth it.
Nukes are pretty inefficient in terms of energy conversion. So much of their energy is converted into useless light and long term radiation instead of pure explosive force. Now maybe you want the area denial that the long term radiation gives, but generally it is not a desirable part of a nuke.
The rods are much more focused with their energy, which in theory makes them better against a hardened target like a deep underground bunker even if they have much less overall energy than a nuke. The rods can also still level cities if you want, and without that nasty radiation to worry about.
That's the thing though, that one megaton is the useful energy. There's a reason why the comparison is to tons of TNT. It's omnidirectional, sure, but when it's literally a million times more force than dropping a telephone pole from orbit, it doesn't terribly matter what direction it's going in.
As for what sort of damage a rod from god would do, a bomb of similar yield (the US military's M118s) clears forest for about 150 feet in every direction when detonated at ground level. A KKW is going to do a lot less, simply because it doesn't produce the same sort of overpressure wave that a bomb blast does, and deposits most of its energy directly into what it hits. Great for bunker busting, but likely to leave the building next door standing, if with a lot of broken windows, and probably cheaper to just drop a bomb designed for the same purpose on whatever you're aiming at.
That heavily depends on the mass of the rod though. If you were to manufacture one in space, it could be comparable to the Barringer Crater impact quite easily.
Fate is in heaven, armor is on the chest, accomplishment is in the feet. - Nagao Kagetora
2020/06/19 00:35:39
Subject: Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction
BaronIveagh wrote: That heavily depends on the mass of the rod though. If you were to manufacture one in space, it could be comparable to the Barringer Crater impact quite easily.
Sure, if you built it in the asteroid belt, threw a whole bunch of thrusters on it, and then threw it at Earth from there so you have time to build up the requisite velocity. You're probably better off just building a bomb though.
2020/06/19 06:25:37
Subject: Re:Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction
Waiting for my shill money from Spiral Arm Studios
Well nothing stops you from also putting a warhead in the rod if you want. You could just plant a regular old 1k lb bomb in the tail end of the rod and rig up an impact detonator, or even have a few with small nuclear warheads. It would be a versatile weapon system.
Self-proclaimed evil Cat-person. Dues Ex Felines
Cato Sicarius, after force feeding Captain Ventris a copy of the Codex Astartes for having the audacity to play Deathwatch, chokes to death on his own D-baggery after finding Calgar assembling his new Eldar army.
Grey Templar wrote: Well nothing stops you from also putting a warhead in the rod if you want. You could just plant a regular old 1k lb bomb in the tail end of the rod and rig up an impact detonator, or even have a few with small nuclear warheads. It would be a versatile weapon system.
I mean, sure. But why bother when you could just drop a bomb from 5,000 feet instead of from orbit? About the only thing KKWs have going for them is simplicity (if you squint at them funny and ignore getting them into position in the first place, or having to shield it from reentry, or the thousand other problems with the idea). Once you start slapping on warheads and guidance systems and thrusters you just have a missile that you spent a silly amount of money to put in space for no apparent reason.
2020/06/19 16:37:26
Subject: Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction
One advantage over “conventional” nukes is the deployment time. The rods only take minutes from command to impact. They also have a near vertical drop giving very little time for the target to react, and almost no chance for interception. Compared to an ICBM, that could take hours from launch to detonation.
I doubt they would actually see use... once they’re in space whomever put them there is apt to see some serious international political issues. I think there are treaties prohibiting their use, but treaties tend to be ignored in the face of actual war.
Cost wise, getting the rods to space is expensive, but I imagine so is building, equipping, maintaining, and providing personnel to a nuclear launch silo. Once a rod is in orbit, there’s not a lot of upkeep expenses, you know?
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/06/20 06:43:07
2020/06/21 18:29:09
Subject: Re:Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction
Laughing Man wrote: About the only thing KKWs have going for them is simplicity (if you squint at them funny and ignore getting them into position in the first place, or having to shield it from reentry, or the thousand other problems with the idea). .
Actually it has several advantages over a nuke. For example, if you make it out of solid tungsten, you don't have to shield it from re-entery. It's not like a nuke that only lasts for about 20 years, so they can be positioned indefinitely, and has near zero maintenance requirements. It lacks the nasty radiation, meaning you could kill everything in an entire country with them, and not have to worry about cleanup. (And if you don't think this is of interest, remember that it's what drove the US military's program build a Neutron Bomb with the idea that it would be cleaner)
I doubt they would actually see use... once they’re in space whomever put them there is apt to see some serious international political issues. I think there are treaties prohibiting their use, but treaties tend to be ignored in the face of actual war.
Actually the good old Rod from God is exempt from those treaties. It is one of the reasons that so many militaries have looked at the idea. Then again, so is the good ol Microwave laser from space, and those have legitimate usefulness outside military applications, so would be easier to justify.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/06/21 18:31:36
Fate is in heaven, armor is on the chest, accomplishment is in the feet. - Nagao Kagetora
2020/06/22 15:15:26
Subject: Re:Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction
Laughing Man wrote: About the only thing KKWs have going for them is simplicity (if you squint at them funny and ignore getting them into position in the first place, or having to shield it from reentry, or the thousand other problems with the idea). .
Actually it has several advantages over a nuke. For example, if you make it out of solid tungsten, you don't have to shield it from re-entery. It's not like a nuke that only lasts for about 20 years, so they can be positioned indefinitely, and has near zero maintenance requirements. It lacks the nasty radiation, meaning you could kill everything in an entire country with them, and not have to worry about cleanup. (And if you don't think this is of interest, remember that it's what drove the US military's program build a Neutron Bomb with the idea that it would be cleaner)
Except it's nowhere near as dangerous as a nuke. A ten ton rod is basically about as dangerous as a 2000lb iron bomb. A ten ton nuke kills everything within ten miles.
2020/06/23 07:14:02
Subject: Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction
If the intention is to kill, use bombs.
But, if strikes and subdual are the goal, rods sound like better options.
Killing can be done in so many other ways. Bombs have always been the preferred option in the past, as they are packaged for transport. If you are in orbit, bombs are more complex than they have to be. Just throw a few bags of ball bearings at the target.
Yeah, seriously, who on earth thinks in future warfare a goal will be to kill everything within 10 miles? Look how badly bombings from WWII such as Dresden are perceived now, and the growing and legitimate anger of collateral damage from recent wars...
Countries don't want to kill everything within 10 miles, as they don't want the political fallout (pun intended) and consequences of such an action.
Nukes are only around still because of the deterrent factor, not to be actually used, it's the threat of use where the value is.
In addition to that, if future wars are really going to be fought over resources predominantly, be it fuel, water or land... They aren't going to make that whole area useless, even if the fallout it only lasts a small amount of time, you'll be destroying the logistics base in the area, which will take resources to rebuild.... Defeating the object. Precision will be more useful.
Precision will be the goal. Hence, rods from god will have a use.
Cycling back to the talk of lasers anyway, that is also another reason why missiles and planes dropping bombs will not be the most viable foolproof tactic.
The point of rods is not to make other weapon systems defunct, it is the option and utility it gives you. It's an addition, not a replacement.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/06/23 07:46:55
My hobby instagram account: @the_shroud_of_vigilance My Shroud of Vigilance Hobby update blog for me detailed updates and lore on the faction:
Blog
2020/06/23 10:51:39
Subject: Re:Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction
Precision will be the goal. Hence, rods from god will have a use.
Precision is the exact reason that rods from god will not have a use. They will be unable to accurately alter their course whilst re-entering the atmosphere due to the ionisation of the air around them interfering with any signals attempting to guide them and have very limited time to adjust their trajectory to account for atmospheric effects which deviate them from their projected path after completing their burn to enter a sub-orbital trajectory.
You're better off just launching a large conventional guided missile if you want precision.
The Laws of Thermodynamics:
1) You cannot win. 2) You cannot break even. 3) You cannot stop playing the game.
Colonel Flagg wrote:You think you're real smart. But you're not smart; you're dumb. Very dumb. But you've met your match in me.
2020/06/23 16:53:31
Subject: Re:Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction
endlesswaltz123 wrote: Yeah, seriously, who on earth thinks in future warfare a goal will be to kill everything within 10 miles? Look how badly bombings from WWII such as Dresden are perceived now, and the growing and legitimate anger of collateral damage from recent wars...
Countries don't want to kill everything within 10 miles, as they don't want the political fallout (pun intended) and consequences of such an action.
Nukes are only around still because of the deterrent factor, not to be actually used, it's the threat of use where the value is.
In addition to that, if future wars are really going to be fought over resources predominantly, be it fuel, water or land... They aren't going to make that whole area useless, even if the fallout it only lasts a small amount of time, you'll be destroying the logistics base in the area, which will take resources to rebuild.... Defeating the object. Precision will be more useful.
Precision will be the goal. Hence, rods from god will have a use.
Cycling back to the talk of lasers anyway, that is also another reason why missiles and planes dropping bombs will not be the most viable foolproof tactic.
The point of rods is not to make other weapon systems defunct, it is the option and utility it gives you. It's an addition, not a replacement.
I'm not the one who compared them to nukes in the first place and talked about levelling cities with them. I just pointed out that their effective yield is about 20% weight efficient, compared to TNT.
2020/06/23 17:07:01
Subject: Re:Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction
Precision will be the goal. Hence, rods from god will have a use.
Precision is the exact reason that rods from god will not have a use. They will be unable to accurately alter their course whilst re-entering the atmosphere due to the ionisation of the air around them interfering with any signals attempting to guide them and have very limited time to adjust their trajectory to account for atmospheric effects which deviate them from their projected path after completing their burn to enter a sub-orbital trajectory.
You're better off just launching a large conventional guided missile if you want precision.
Wouldn't that be taken into account before it is fired? A lot of the same fundamentals required to perform a long range sniper kill? With evidently more variables to account for..
I'm not suggesting by any means that it would be as easy as that mind, but if you are firing it at a large enough target, with dialled in calibration they must be able to get it fairly precise and accurate enough to hit a largish target.
For arguments sake, let's say the white house, in fairly beneficial weather conditions, they only have 1 shot. Do you think that is an unachievable goal? Honest question, I may as well learn something...
My hobby instagram account: @the_shroud_of_vigilance My Shroud of Vigilance Hobby update blog for me detailed updates and lore on the faction:
Blog
2020/06/23 18:05:33
Subject: Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction
greatbigtree wrote: One advantage over “conventional” nukes is the deployment time. The rods only take minutes from command to impact. They also have a near vertical drop giving very little time for the target to react, and almost no chance for interception. Compared to an ICBM, that could take hours from launch to detonation.
Wouldn't the drop point need to be in the proper position to immediately deploy? I do not think we would have the earth covered, but stationary satellites over key areas in advance could work, I suppose. However, i think keeping anything in space is not a keen idea. Hasn't anyone watched 'Space Force' w/ Steve Carrell? ...those dirty chinese and their sabotage...
Except it's nowhere near as dangerous as a nuke. A ten ton rod is basically about as dangerous as a 2000lb iron bomb. A ten ton nuke kills everything within ten miles.
Your math is bad here. According to a 2003 air-force report, a 10 ton impactor traveling at mach 10, would hit with the force of 12 tons of tnt, The Russian RDS-220, the largest nuke ever detonated, weighing in at 20 tons, only has a 100% kill radius of 3 miles if used properly, but used incorrectly in a ground strike to maximize the 100% zone, you're looking at just 5 miles. Mind you, it will cause 3rd degree burns for 45 miles, and minor damage for 50, but these are reduced in a ground strike.
Fate is in heaven, armor is on the chest, accomplishment is in the feet. - Nagao Kagetora
2020/07/26 12:23:58
Subject: Re:Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction
with keepers suspicious the baboons were being armed ‘for a laugh’ by visitors hoping they would then wreak havoc with other people’s cars.
The poor man really has a stake in the country. The rich man hasn't; he can go away to New Guinea in a yacht. The poor have sometimes objected to being governed badly; the rich have always objected to being governed at all
We love our superheroes because they refuse to give up on us. We can analyze them out of existence, kill them, ban them, mock them, and still they return, patiently reminding us of who we are and what we wish we could be.
"the play's the thing wherein I'll catch the conscience of the king,
2020/09/08 17:54:29
Subject: Re:Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction
Romanian village finds that the affection of Prince Charles is ‘a blessing and a curse’ as tourists flock there
If there's one group of people I am willing to listen to with regards to curses relating to foreign members of the aristocracy then it's villagers in Transylvania.
The poor man really has a stake in the country. The rich man hasn't; he can go away to New Guinea in a yacht. The poor have sometimes objected to being governed badly; the rich have always objected to being governed at all
We love our superheroes because they refuse to give up on us. We can analyze them out of existence, kill them, ban them, mock them, and still they return, patiently reminding us of who we are and what we wish we could be.
"the play's the thing wherein I'll catch the conscience of the king,
2020/09/14 18:19:29
Subject: Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction
A biotech company in the U.S. has been granted ethical permission by the National Institutes of Health to use 20 brain-dead patients for what is sure to be a highly controversial study: From next year, they plan to stimulate their nervous systems in order to restart the brains. Bioquark is hoping that its part in the groundbreaking ReAnima project will reveal if people can at least partly be brought back from the dead.
It is important to note that at this point, there isn’t much evidence to suggest how genuinely realistic or even serious this endeavor is; however, the panel of experts working on the initiative does include Dr. Calixto Machado, a well-known neurological researcher and a member of the American Academy of Neurology who has written extensively on brain death, and it does appear to have proper approval from the U.S. authorities.
The team will test a combination of therapies on the participants, who have been medically certified as being brain dead and are only kept from decomposing by life support machines. Injecting the brain with stem cells, giving the spinal cord infusions of beneficial chemicals, and nerve stimulation techniques – which have been shown to bring people out of comas – will all be tried out.
Bioquark Inc. Receives IRB Approval for First-In-Human Brain Death Study - https://t.co/NrO3Fqsfn9 pic.twitter.com/sE4yojqYEc
— IraSamuel Pastor (@IraSamuelPastor) April 20, 2016
After each therapy has been administered, the team will monitor the brain activity of the participants for several months, hoping to look for signs of neurological reactivation. Their focus will be on the upper spinal cord, which is the lowermost part of the brain stream that controls a person’s cardiorespiratory functions – breathing and a beating heart, essentially.
“To undertake such a complex initiative, we are combining biologic regenerative medicine tools with other existing medical devices typically used for stimulation of the central nervous system, in patients with other severe disorders of consciousness,” said Ira Pastor, the CEO of Bioquark Inc., as reported by the Telegraph. “We hope to see results within the first two to three months.”
The central nervous system is bioelectrochemical, in that it uses biologically manufactured chemicals called neurotransmitters to transmit electrical signals through the body. Stimulating neurons with electrical currents is one thing – even in a coma, the neurons will be able to respond to electrical stimulation – but after brain death, neurons begin to wither away and degenerate, so for any “resurrection” to occur, the team will need to stimulate the regeneration of neurons in these brain-dead folk.
This is presumably where the stem cells come in, which in their most primitive state can differentiate into any cell in the human body. Although there has been plenty of remarkable progress using them to regenerate damaged heart, pancreatic, eye or even brain tissue, for example, there is a long way to go before stem cells can simply be injected into humans, allowing them to regenerate any type of lost cell.
In any case, the trials will begin at Anupam Hospital in Rudrapur, Uttarakhand in India. For this stage, the brain-dead people will be continuously given cocktails of peptides, chemicals that can act as neurotransmitters, along with biweekly injections of stem cells.
“It is a long-term vision of ours that a full recovery in such patients is a possibility, although that is not the focus of this first study,” Pastor added. “But it is a bridge to that eventuality.”
Jokes aside, good luck to'em, hope they manage some form of -- non flesh eating -- breakthrough.
Can you imagine what it would be like to be brought back from the dead? That’s the kind of gak that’d just send you and before anything else.
See that stuff above? Completely true. All of it, every single word. Stands to reason.
2020/09/14 19:18:37
Subject: Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction
DalekCheese wrote: Can you imagine what it would be like to be brought back from the dead?
Exactly the same as being 'brought back' from unconsciousness. There's nothing magical about death. Lack of conscious experience is lack of conscious experience.
When my father had his first heart attack, he was unconscious for several minutes until the medical team restarted his heart. As he described it later, he just stopped being aware of anything, then started being aware again. Nothing particularly profound about it.
I suppose if you were dead for a long enough time, you'd have to get used to the world being very different when you came back. But people who wake up from long-term comas already have to deal with that, so we know it's possible.
A little bit of righteous anger now and then is good, actually. Don't trust a person who never gets angry.
2020/09/14 22:39:19
Subject: Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction
DalekCheese wrote: Can you imagine what it would be like to be brought back from the dead?
Exactly the same as being 'brought back' from unconsciousness. There's nothing magical about death. Lack of conscious experience is lack of conscious experience.
When my father had his first heart attack, he was unconscious for several minutes until the medical team restarted his heart. As he described it later, he just stopped being aware of anything, then started being aware again. Nothing particularly profound about it.
I suppose if you were dead for a long enough time, you'd have to get used to the world being very different when you came back. But people who wake up from long-term comas already have to deal with that, so we know it's possible.
Also if it's been long enough they'll have severely shortened and weakened muscles. Just moving would be painful.
The only way we can ever solve anything is to look in the mirror and find no enemy
2020/09/16 14:58:53
Subject: Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction
While I am something of a joker, I wouldn't presume to compare myself to him.
Most people go for the Rasputin comparison instead, which I am far more comfortable with, though I still have my balls. (I've been shot at, beaten, stabbed, electrocuted, poisoned, and drown. And, to be fair, I can still vividly remember the expression on a man's face when he realized that the metal rod I was holding was, in fact, very, very hot, as I pressed it into his hands.)
Fate is in heaven, armor is on the chest, accomplishment is in the feet. - Nagao Kagetora
2020/09/29 18:48:06
Subject: Re:Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction
Well its not a hoverboard but this is pretty amazing
Quite amazing how we've gone from those water based jet suits to a full jet powered one. That said I've also seen a few quadcopter type designs with bathtubs that would also do the similar job but also have the option to carry more equipment to the scene; perhaps also with the option (given size) to do collections. Might well be more affordable than helicopters; though a helicopter might well be faster at reaching the general area and offer more long distance travel options.
Be interesting to know how well that suit would work in windy weather; how much the machine can compensate or how much skill would be required from the operator; or even if its practical or safe
6000 pts - Harlies: 1000 pts - 
4000 pts - 
1000 pts - 
1000 pts 
bodes well eh ? 
