Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot], ThinksMarkedly and 50 guests
| Re: Honorverse series, the future..? | |
|---|---|
by kzt
» Sun May 25, 2014 6:00 pm
|
|
|
kzt
Posts: 11360
|
But given the median distance and the density of stars, the odds are approximately zero. Plus you know the general vector, so you can go chase the ones that have some reasonable probability of doing something bad. |
| Top | |
| Re: Honorverse series, the future..? | |
|---|---|
|
by Weird Harold
» Sun May 25, 2014 6:07 pm
|
|
|
Weird Harold
Posts: 4478
|
But NOT zero. A self-destruct contingency setting moves the odds even closer to zero whether you can stay around to search or not. NTM the security aspect of your enemies not-quite-zero chance of recovering your top secret technology. .
. . Answers! I got lots of answers! (Now if I could just find the right questions.) |
| Top | |
| Some Things Must Be Left To Chance | |
|---|---|
|
by HB of CJ
» Sun May 25, 2014 6:15 pm
|
|
|
HB of CJ
Posts: 707
|
But only after all reasonable precautions have been taken to insure the safety and stability of the self destruct systems... how many one may end up with. But like already said better... accidents can and do occur.
History shows us bad luck just happens. The USS Maine probably just went and blew up in Havana harbour, Cuba. In 1943 the IJN (Japanese Navy) lost a battleship at anchor. It just went and blew up too. Bad powder? Major disasters have happened just because a series of very non probably events dove tailed exactly correct to create the disaster. The Titanic comes to mind. The various munitions ships blowing up in WW1 and WW2 also. Our A and H bombs seem very safe. But even then, we have found that we are very lucky there were in fact 13 different safety interlocks on one H bomb, because 12 of them failed. Two thousand years from now? Dunno. HB of CJ (old coot) I love this forum |
| Top | |
| Re: Expended missiles | |
|---|---|
|
by Jonathan_S
» Sun May 25, 2014 8:18 pm
|
|
|
Jonathan_S
Posts: 8971
|
Now, maybe. But I read the book Command and Control: Nuclear Weapons, the Damascus Accident, and the Illusion of Safety a few months ago and the lack of safety in our early designs was scary. The weapons designers even resisted changes to make them safer because it'd make them potentially less reliable in a nuclear war. It catalogs a bunch of accidents that had the potential to have a least a nuclear fission 'fizzle'. (Really interesting, alarming, and well written book) I just had a thought. We know that ship reactors are energetic enough to shred a ship if the failsafes don't work and they blow. How destructive would a microfusion plant blowing be? Or the plasma capacitors shorting out before they're 100% drained? Could a primary self destruct system simply be a deliberate failure of the power system? (If so it would have the advantage of not taking up a lot of extra volume in the missile; not wedging a warhead into a jammer, decoy, or control missile would, or a 2nd warhead into an attack bird.) |
| Top | |
| Re: Expended missiles | |
|---|---|
|
by Weird Harold
» Sun May 25, 2014 8:38 pm
|
|
|
Weird Harold
Posts: 4478
|
That would be one option, but IIRC, all of the RMN's technological advances is protected by an anti-tampering self-destruct anyway. It wouldn't have to be a big device, either; a couple of times, MWW has mentioned "conventional explosives with yields once obtainable only with nuclear weapons." A fist-sized lump (or two) of the honorverse evolution of C4 and a fail-safe, computer controlled, detonator could provide a 0.25 Kiloton demolition blast that would pretty much eliminate any hazard or security risk. .
. . Answers! I got lots of answers! (Now if I could just find the right questions.) |
| Top | |
| Re: Expended missiles | |
|---|---|
|
by crewdude48
» Sun May 25, 2014 8:51 pm
|
|
|
crewdude48
Posts: 889
|
No, its not. This is about the hundredth time someone has corrected this mistake. Missile compensators are part of the nodes, not a separate installation like in a ship. The missile compensators only cancel a fraction of the acceleration, not the entire amount. It is very specifically stated as such. While it does not experience all ninety thousand gravities, it does experience at least thousands of g's. ________________
I'm the Dude...you know, that or His Dudeness, or Duder, or El Duderino if you're not into the whole brevity thing. |
| Top | |
| Re: Expended missiles | |
|---|---|
|
by Brigade XO
» Sun May 25, 2014 9:37 pm
|
|
|
Brigade XO
Posts: 3232
|
Then there was the day that the US dropped an atomic bomb on South Carolina.
US bomber -B 29 I believe- was going somewhere and was about half way between Florence and Myrtle Beach and then they had a little problem with the tackle holding the bomb and the bomb parted company with the bomber. This was from the internal bay, they didn't hang these things on the wing. That was mostly because they didn't land and take off with the bombs armed. They also didn't arm them in the air unless they got "the word" and then it involved the appropriate officers opeing a safe on the plane, removing the trigger device (for the atomic part of the bomb) and installing it on the weapon. The bomb funtioned exactly as designed. When it hit the ground, the nuclear part of the bomb DID NOT explode, but it did get smashed and was a problem cleaning up partialy because the material was scattered around. There was a serious explosion and a wonderfull crater but that was because the the detonation of the very heavy explosive charge that was set up to drive the nuclear trigger into the nuclear portion of the bomb. A very practical example of how to keep from having Murphy turn a really bad accident into monumental catastrophe |
| Top | |
| Re: Expended missiles | |
|---|---|
|
by kzt
» Sun May 25, 2014 10:20 pm
|
|
|
kzt
Posts: 11360
|
You could, but there are some issues with this. The first is that this technique would appear to need to work on all the platforms running this fusion plant, like the recon drones (which use the same reactor as a Mk23/Mk16). Systems that could forseeably result in megaton yield oopsies in the boat bay seem likely to result in a certain level of opposition from BuShips. One issue is the objective to prevent capture or to prevent some almost infinitely small chance of a missile hitting something 23 LY away? For the latter you need to actually turn the entire object into vapor, as fragmenting it increases the threat. And nukes are really not all that great at this, as things quite close the a large warhead have survived tests intact. |
| Top | |
| I Love This Forum | |
|---|---|
|
by HB of CJ
» Sun May 25, 2014 10:32 pm
|
|
|
HB of CJ
Posts: 707
|
No rank, no yelling, just fun. Several things. This may be a long post. Hope not. Get to it Dummy! Funny about the B47 who lost that BIG H bomb over the Carolinas. Seems the three headed monster, (navigator, flight engineer and bomb guy) heard a "thump" and the bomb deck slowly changed some air pressure, plus a "bomb bay open" light on the panel lit up.
He had to grab his small O2 bottle and crawl through the tiny pressure hatch to the bomb bay to check things out. They were on a training mission and the two big bombs they had were not armed, but they were two big H bombs. They were carried back then all the time. He manages to get into and on the bomb bay crawl space crawl way, then stands up. The bomb bay door was cracked open about one sixth of one inch. Very noisy, but no big deal. Not enough to affect aerodynamics....yet. Suddenly the door jerked open about two inches. WAP! He panic reacted and lost his balance, falling forward towards the rear of the aircraft. He grabbed out to stop his fall... and grabbed the emergency release arm. The big multi ton H bomb dropped free from the shackle... right through the bomb bay doors. Ripped both right off the aircraft, ruining the aerodynamics. He almost fell from the plane also. The pilot did manage to regain control and they landed safely minus both bomb doors and one big H bomb. The triple headed monster did not mean to grap the emergency jettison arm. Consider it a major design weakness of the aircraft. It was immediately corrected. The aforementioned big H bomb did fall from the bomb bay. Ah Shiet! It fell to earth somewhere in the Carolinas on the USA Eastern seaboard. Anyhow, I did talk with a close SAC friend of the dumb stupid brilliant smart SAC officer who did that deed. He never flew again. Was forced to resign. This is true as I know it. Crazy how accidents happen. Regarding Mantie self destruct systems, might they have a combination of many different chemical and nuke type small charges placed throughout the bus of the various missiles and pods? Lots and lots of fail safe fall back systems. It might be possible that explosives actually make up part of the chassis? I think they would be very careful designing and testing such a system. HB of CJ (old coot) Lt.Cm. |
| Top | |
| Re: I Love This Forum | |
|---|---|
|
by kzt
» Sun May 25, 2014 11:25 pm
|
|
|
kzt
Posts: 11360
|
Though given that they seem to be planning on having new missiles produced on new production equipment made by new vendors and operated by newly trained operators, exactly how are they going to test and re-qualify this sort of thing? For an example, see the ATK cold soak issue with the AMRAAM motors and the FOGBANK issue. |
| Top | |