| Anyone see the maps of nuc impacts in London? on 09:52 - Feb 23 with 1653 views | Keno |
Pah!!
That’s nothing compared to the devastation caused by the great fire of playford rd! |  |
|  |
| Anyone see the maps of nuc impacts in London? on 10:15 - Feb 23 with 1596 views | You_Bloo_Right |
It's not many times you'll see Croydon mentioned as a safe area. |  |
| |
| Anyone see the maps of nuc impacts in London? on 10:19 - Feb 23 with 1581 views | GavTWTD |
Well that's cheery |  |
| |
| Anyone see the maps of nuc impacts in London? on 10:29 - Feb 23 with 1546 views | bluelagos |
| Anyone see the maps of nuc impacts in London? on 10:19 - Feb 23 by GavTWTD |
Well that's cheery |
Doing my bit for the estate agents in Kesgrave.
"Get all the benefits of living in Ipswich without nuclear fallout this winter" |  |
| |
| Anyone see the maps of nuc impacts in London? on 10:32 - Feb 23 with 1535 views | leitrimblue |
Is it because Haverhill has quite rightly been singled out as the likely base for any post apocalyptic resistance movement? I think The Rebel Alliance as a nice ring to it |  | | |
| Anyone see the maps of nuc impacts in London? on 10:35 - Feb 23 with 1521 views | bluelagos |
| Anyone see the maps of nuc impacts in London? on 10:32 - Feb 23 by leitrimblue |
Is it because Haverhill has quite rightly been singled out as the likely base for any post apocalyptic resistance movement? I think The Rebel Alliance as a nice ring to it |
Damn, and I was including Haverhill within my search for my ideal house move... | |
| |
| Anyone see the maps of nuc impacts in London? on 10:37 - Feb 23 with 1499 views | leitrimblue |
| Anyone see the maps of nuc impacts in London? on 10:35 - Feb 23 by bluelagos |
Damn, and I was including Haverhill within my search for my ideal house move... |
If any of its outstanding cultural heritage survives the initial impact/fallout I highly recommend it. | | | |
| Anyone see the maps of nuc impacts in London? on 10:38 - Feb 23 with 1497 views | bluelagos |
| Anyone see the maps of nuc impacts in London? on 10:19 - Feb 23 by GavTWTD |
Well that's cheery |
Yet still marginally less depressing than reading the "hypothetically speaking" thread... | |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| Anyone see the maps of nuc impacts in London? on 10:40 - Feb 23 with 1484 views | chicoazul |
One could make a very good argument that nuclear weapons and MAD are the greatest instruments for peace in European history.
Shame we just ended up exporting our wars to Asia Africa and South America instead. |  |
| |
| Anyone see the maps of nuc impacts in London? on 10:44 - Feb 23 with 1468 views | bluelagos |
| Anyone see the maps of nuc impacts in London? on 10:40 - Feb 23 by chicoazul |
One could make a very good argument that nuclear weapons and MAD are the greatest instruments for peace in European history.
Shame we just ended up exporting our wars to Asia Africa and South America instead. |
The theory of nuclear deterrence (MAD) only works when those holding them are not themselves, mad.
Hence why we seem reluctant to see North Korea, Iran, Iraq and a few other places get hold of them. | |
| |
| Anyone see the maps of nuc impacts in London? on 10:46 - Feb 23 with 1453 views | Keno |
| Anyone see the maps of nuc impacts in London? on 10:29 - Feb 23 by bluelagos |
Doing my bit for the estate agents in Kesgrave.
"Get all the benefits of living in Ipswich without nuclear fallout this winter" |
Benefits and Kesgrave
two words you dont normally see together | |
| |
| Anyone see the maps of nuc impacts in London? on 10:57 - Feb 23 with 1429 views | Guthrum |
The so-called Tsar Bomba was a one-off purely experimental device with a tested yield of approximately 50Mt and a theoretical one (with the unused third-stage uranium jacket) of double that. Basically an excercise by the Soviet Union in 1961 to see how big an explosion it was possible to create.
While it did come in the form of a air-deliverable bomb, the 'plane was barely capable of lifting it over a very short range (and only just able to itself escape the subsequent blast, heat and radiation). Vastly too heavy to mount on a missile. In other words, not really a practical weapon for use in war.
But it looks spectacular on maps like that one. [Post edited 23 Feb 2022 10:58]
|  |
| |
| Anyone see the maps of nuc impacts in London? on 10:59 - Feb 23 with 1412 views | jeera |
| Anyone see the maps of nuc impacts in London? on 10:44 - Feb 23 by bluelagos |
The theory of nuclear deterrence (MAD) only works when those holding them are not themselves, mad.
Hence why we seem reluctant to see North Korea, Iran, Iraq and a few other places get hold of them. |
And yet they're not the nations who have actually used one to date.
Horrible concept. Who the feck would even want to stock these things? |  |
| |
| Anyone see the maps of nuc impacts in London? on 11:01 - Feb 23 with 1401 views | The_Flashing_Smile |
Why does the blast range go to Denmark in the second to last one? Is that just the wind direction they've chosen? |  |
| Trust the process. Trust Phil. |
| |
| Anyone see the maps of nuc impacts in London? on 11:05 - Feb 23 with 1391 views | bluelagos |
| Anyone see the maps of nuc impacts in London? on 11:01 - Feb 23 by The_Flashing_Smile |
Why does the blast range go to Denmark in the second to last one? Is that just the wind direction they've chosen? |
The so-called Tsar Bomba was a one-off purely experimental device with a tested yield of approximately 50Mt and a theoretical one (with the unused third-stage uranium jacket) of double that. Basically an excercise by the Soviet Union in 1961 to see how big an explosion it was possible to create.
While it did come in the form of a air-deliverable bomb, the 'plane was barely capable of lifting it over a very short range (and only just able to itself escape the subsequent blast, heat and radiation). Vastly too heavy to mount on a missile. In other words, not really a practical weapon for use in war.
But it looks spectacular on maps like that one.
*I might have copied and pasted that off Guthers :-) | |
| |
| Anyone see the maps of nuc impacts in London? on 11:05 - Feb 23 with 1389 views | Guthrum |
| Anyone see the maps of nuc impacts in London? on 10:59 - Feb 23 by jeera |
And yet they're not the nations who have actually used one to date.
Horrible concept. Who the feck would even want to stock these things? |
Tho that was before some of the most long-term harmful elements, such as fallout, were properly understood.
As for why to stock them, once invented (and several nations were working on them even before WWII) if your rivals have them and you do not, thet gives them unanswerable leverage.
The problem deriving from that is if both are well stocked and one side wishes to push their luck, you're left with a choice between backing down and everyone ending up dead. Which no rational man would risk, but an unbalanced or desperate gambler might. | |
| |
| Anyone see the maps of nuc impacts in London? on 11:08 - Feb 23 with 1370 views | jeera |
| Anyone see the maps of nuc impacts in London? on 11:05 - Feb 23 by Guthrum |
Tho that was before some of the most long-term harmful elements, such as fallout, were properly understood.
As for why to stock them, once invented (and several nations were working on them even before WWII) if your rivals have them and you do not, thet gives them unanswerable leverage.
The problem deriving from that is if both are well stocked and one side wishes to push their luck, you're left with a choice between backing down and everyone ending up dead. Which no rational man would risk, but an unbalanced or desperate gambler might. |
I understand the concept thank you but I don't have to like it.
We're going backwards buh. | |
| |
| Anyone see the maps of nuc impacts in London? on 11:08 - Feb 23 with 1370 views | bluelagos |
| Anyone see the maps of nuc impacts in London? on 11:05 - Feb 23 by Guthrum |
Tho that was before some of the most long-term harmful elements, such as fallout, were properly understood.
As for why to stock them, once invented (and several nations were working on them even before WWII) if your rivals have them and you do not, thet gives them unanswerable leverage.
The problem deriving from that is if both are well stocked and one side wishes to push their luck, you're left with a choice between backing down and everyone ending up dead. Which no rational man would risk, but an unbalanced or desperate gambler might. |
What got me - growing up in the 80s - was the maps showing a load of dots - and then the comment that each dot represented the nuclear weapons needed to kill everyone in the world.
There were lots of dots - namely the yanks and rusksies could end the world 100 times over and then some.
The nuclear arms race all became more than a bit stupid... | |
| |
| Anyone see the maps of nuc impacts in London? on 11:10 - Feb 23 with 1355 views | SWGF |
Most concerning part of that article is that the journalist doesn't know the difference between "affect" and "effect". |  |
| |
| Anyone see the maps of nuc impacts in London? on 11:11 - Feb 23 with 1335 views | Keno |
| Anyone see the maps of nuc impacts in London? on 11:10 - Feb 23 by SWGF |
Most concerning part of that article is that the journalist doesn't know the difference between "affect" and "effect". |
and haw is that effecting you? | |
| |
| Anyone see the maps of nuc impacts in London? on 11:13 - Feb 23 with 1321 views | leitrimblue |
| Anyone see the maps of nuc impacts in London? on 11:11 - Feb 23 by Keno |
and haw is that effecting you? |
It's massing with me haed | | | |
| Anyone see the maps of nuc impacts in London? on 11:13 - Feb 23 with 1321 views | The_Flashing_Smile |
| Anyone see the maps of nuc impacts in London? on 11:05 - Feb 23 by bluelagos |
The so-called Tsar Bomba was a one-off purely experimental device with a tested yield of approximately 50Mt and a theoretical one (with the unused third-stage uranium jacket) of double that. Basically an excercise by the Soviet Union in 1961 to see how big an explosion it was possible to create.
While it did come in the form of a air-deliverable bomb, the 'plane was barely capable of lifting it over a very short range (and only just able to itself escape the subsequent blast, heat and radiation). Vastly too heavy to mount on a missile. In other words, not really a practical weapon for use in war.
But it looks spectacular on maps like that one.
*I might have copied and pasted that off Guthers :-) |
You did. And it still didn't answer my question. | |
| Trust the process. Trust Phil. |
| |
| Anyone see the maps of nuc impacts in London? on 11:13 - Feb 23 with 1316 views | bluelagos |
| Anyone see the maps of nuc impacts in London? on 11:11 - Feb 23 by Keno |
and haw is that effecting you? |
Be fair - if we are on the verge of WW3 and nuclear obliteration we can at least go down with good grammer and speelling. | |
| |
| Anyone see the maps of nuc impacts in London? on 11:15 - Feb 23 with 1304 views | jeera |
| Anyone see the maps of nuc impacts in London? on 11:11 - Feb 23 by Keno |
and haw is that effecting you? |
With radio propaganda? | |
| |
| Anyone see the maps of nuc impacts in London? on 11:20 - Feb 23 with 1290 views | leitrimblue |
| Anyone see the maps of nuc impacts in London? on 11:08 - Feb 23 by bluelagos |
What got me - growing up in the 80s - was the maps showing a load of dots - and then the comment that each dot represented the nuclear weapons needed to kill everyone in the world.
There were lots of dots - namely the yanks and rusksies could end the world 100 times over and then some.
The nuclear arms race all became more than a bit stupid... |
I have this faint, but still mildly disturbing memory of being forced to watch some kinda movie about the effects of a nuclear holocaust on a small town at some point in the early 80,s. I'm not sure if they made the entire school watch it | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
