The Ultimate Rifle

Finally.. something adequate for killer squirrels and chipmunks.

Gentlemen, our days of living in fear are officially over.

so um... who wants to lure them out?
 
Area denial, meant to irradiate large areas of land incase of war, back when the thinking was in a nuclear war up to 400 warheads a day would be used by either side instead of the more recent thinking of "mutual destruction".

So you have a enemy column moving in on you? Don't have the manpower in Europe to actually stop them? Just launch one of these bad boys in their column to stop them where they are.

The biggest problem at the time for this weapon was it gave the power to launch nuclear weapons to "lower ranks" (mainly Sgts in charged of the units), which was why it got canned.

Dimitri
 
Yeah, not a lot of clear thinking going on at the time. Deja Vu all over again. Has anyone here seen "Fog of War. Eleven lessons from life of Robert MacNamara." I think it was lesson #3 "Rationality will not save us". When describing the Cuban Missile crisis. "Kennedy was rational, Khruschev was rational, Castro was rational... rational individuals came that close to nuclear war... and that danger exsists today."

That is just a minature version of Atomic Annie. She was a 280mm artillery piece capable of launching a 15 Kt device about 13 miles onto a target. Now they tested it alongside a larger device at 28 Kt that was air dropped. The 15 Kt device produced a great deal more damage due to the angle of attack, and set up a precursor loading wave that probably tripled it's effect. I'll get some YouTube links from the documentary "Trinity and Beyond."

This was the best I could find without too much searching that wasn't too long
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P2RO6lo84Hc

From 1944 to 1962,the U.S. government performed around 330 atmospheric tests. Not counting Russia, China, Pakistan, India, and everyone else who cobbled a 5 Megaton + firecracker together and stuck it in a mailbox to get their jollies. Scary huh?
 
Dimitri said:
Area denial, meant to irradiate large areas of land incase of war, back when the thinking was in a nuclear war up to 400 warheads a day would be used by either side instead of the more recent thinking of "mutual destruction".

So you have a enemy column moving in on you? Don't have the manpower in Europe to actually stop them? Just launch one of these bad boys in their column to stop them where they are.

The biggest problem at the time for this weapon was it gave the power to launch nuclear weapons to "lower ranks" (mainly Sgts in charged of the units), which was why it got canned.

Dimitri
Click to expand...

Interesting - that device would pretty much be guaranteed to be used in that context.
 
We we always must remember the context, at the time of the initial production (1956) development of ICBMs was in early stages with fielding of enough ICBM's to make it practical to remove the majority of nuclear bombing roles (Which would have suffered high causality rates just like World War 2 bombers) did not happen till mid 1960's.

Goal of nuclear war at the time, was not a issue of casualties, but instead a issue of causing the most damage possible to limit the damage the enemy can do to your own forces and country. So if the US could confine the war to Europe, Alaska and the Oceans by using short range and longer range nuclear weapons in and around those areas it would be in their best interest to do so ... the goal of the US would be fighting a war with as much of the US being untouched by the time the stale mate occurs would be their primary goal.

Dimitri
 
You'd think that by now, 40 years later, they could have developed something like that seen in the movie screamers. A plutonium rocket.

Instead they gave up on a bad design right off the bat... or did they?
 
KBRACEY;
We had hoped to keep this quiet, the guns are not really a problem, we could sell them "deactivated"

However the main problem is finding "disposable" and low cost workers to deactivate the warheads....

Just think of the ads we could have " be the first on your block with a portable nuke"

Now for the reloading equipment.
John
 
I remember those "nuclear hand grenades" from my 60s and 70s NBCW training.
To me, it didn't seem that there was much point to a weapon where the lethal damage exceeds the range ...
or is there?
These,
and the "suitcase nukes",
seem like the ideal escalator to heaven for the modern dedicated suicide bomber.

If you want a different perspective on Nukes,
see that old Chinese propaganda/training film where the Chinese military sent a CAVALRY brigade into the fallout from one of their earlier Nuke tests. These poor sods were
"on manouvers" in the dust cloud for a few days ...
proving that men [ and horses] could survive and fight even in this sh!tstorm.

I guess the men and horses were considered "EXPENDABLE" ...
not much use for Cavalry any more in the modern armies.

ALL THIS JUST TO MAKE A TRAINING/PROPAGANDA FILM,
to convince the common soldiers that nuclear weapons were not a REAL threat.

Imagine what theChinese military would be willing to do to their enemies,
if they were willing to do this to their own soldiers???

I wonder,
did anyone report the Chinese generals to the SPCA?
And, did they had the usual FILM disclaimer ...
No animals were harmerd duruing the making of this movie ... blah ..blah ..blah???
Probably not?
[;{(
LAZ 1

.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom