Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Militarized Dolphins Protect Almost a Quarter of the US Nuclear Stockpile

military.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 231 posts

Re: Militarized Dolphins Protect Almost a Quarter of the US Nuclear Stockpile

#191

Post by greedo »

mlac wrote: post #95
thelittleone wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No doubt surreal, but a single sub destroy the world? That piqued my interest so took a quick look and found an article [1]. This article states that "even a single vessel [submarine] could reduce as many as 288 city-sized targets into radioactive ash in less than 30 minutes." Later in the article they say that the Ohio class is capable of carrying up to 24 UGM-133 Trident II D5 submarine launched ballistic missiles.…

The submarine might burrow itself down into the Mariana Trench and then set them all off at the same time. This would open a crack in the ocean floor, draining the ocean. I’m studying how these things work where this guy went to school: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cesSRfXqS1Q

SSBNs have a launch depth that is much shallower than the Marianas Trench... This isn't the Abyss.

Re: Militarized Dolphins Protect Almost a Quarter of the US Nuclear Stockpile

#192

Post by UncleOxidant »

poulsbohemian wrote: post #19

This isn't exactly a secret or new information... it was pretty well known when I lived on the peninsula 10+ years ago (thus the username, Poulsbohemian...). There's a state park right near the Hood Canal bridge where it isn't uncommon to watch the submarines come and go in and out of the canal. Always a bit surreal to push your kids on the swings while watching a first strike weapon capable of destroying the world p…

We lived right on Hood Canal a few miles south of the sub base in the early 80s. Such a beautiful, peaceful place but pretty much right at ground zero. As a high school student I worked a summer at the Naval Undersea Warfare and Engineering station. We even had our Senior Prom at the on-base restaurant there at Bangor.

Re: Militarized Dolphins Protect Almost a Quarter of the US Nuclear Stockpile

#194

Post by therockspush »

I remember seeing similar dolphin pens down in San Diego across from Coronado.

Floating by in a little 20 foot Catalina while the sail of a nuclear sub cruises by is surreal.

You can see the pens on google maps.

https://www.google.com/maps/@32.701949,-117.2360585,297m/dat...

Re: Militarized Dolphins Protect Almost a Quarter of the US Nuclear Stockpile

#195

Post by ALittleLight »

formvoltron wrote: post #145
chipsa wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Second strike weapon. It is supposed to be able to survive someone else's first strike. First strike weapons can't survive someone else's first strike. It's part of the whole "assured destruction" thing: doesn't matter if you hit us first, you're still going to end up a self lit parking lot afterwards.

The obvious problem with mutual assured destruction is that an insane person could get ahold of the weapons, launch first, and kill all of current and future humanity. How about not strike back, just try to survive & show future generations of the world how to be. Go live in that other country that isn't radioactive.

I've always thought nuclear war is basically Newcomb's Paradox. You want to be perceived as a one boxer (will retaliate) until the exact moment to make a choice when you two box (hold retaliation to let others live).

Re: Militarized Dolphins Protect Almost a Quarter of the US Nuclear Stockpile

#196

Post by ASalazarMX »

nkrisc wrote: post #114
thelittleone wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No doubt surreal, but a single sub destroy the world? That piqued my interest so took a quick look and found an article [1]. This article states that "even a single vessel [submarine] could reduce as many as 288 city-sized targets into radioactive ash in less than 30 minutes." Later in the article they say that the Ohio class is capable of carrying up to 24 UGM-133 Trident II D5 submarine launched ballistic missiles.…

I don’t think they meant literally destroy the Earth. Nothing we have could possibly do that. But it could easily destroy our world here on Earth. I have to imagine the world as we know it would cease to exist after such an attack. Everything we take for granted today would probably be gone pretty quickly, the collapse of civilization in much of the world. It’s a fun bit of research you did, but I think it’s disingen…

While a complete nuclear war would cause radioactive waste to reach all the globe, humanity and civilization will likely survive, in the form of countries that were not primary targets.

For example, in North America USA would be severely crippled, but Mexico would be mainly unscathed. Canada probably too, as it officially has no nuclear capabilities.

Re: Militarized Dolphins Protect Almost a Quarter of the US Nuclear Stockpile

#197

Post by smilespray »

BasilPH wrote: post #168
Nullinker wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But we should also not underestimate the ability of the enemy to train dolphins. It would be hard to send an strike team of just dolphins but I imagine a strike team of both humans and dolphins trained to fend of the defending dolphins and protect the divers would stand a chance.

AFAIK dolphins are never used together with friendly divers against other divers as the dolphins can't discern between friends or foes.

Just make sure the enemy team wears red diving suits and the friendlies wear blue ones. Foolproof!

Re: Militarized Dolphins Protect Almost a Quarter of the US Nuclear Stockpile

#198

Post by JohnBooty »

philipkglass wrote: post #177
JohnBooty wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Correct. But - modern bombs are more powerful, but is there greater residual radioactivity?

The residual radioactivity decays at the same rate, but there's also more of it (roughly proportional to weapon yield). Since modern weapons yield much more energy than the bombs of 1945 they also yield much more radioactivity. Further, surface or ground-penetrating attacks against military targets would tend to rain out much more of the radioactive material locally than the relatively high altitude airburst strikes…

Thank you for the very patient and informative reply!

Re: Militarized Dolphins Protect Almost a Quarter of the US Nuclear Stockpile

#199

Post by ASalazarMX »

ars wrote: post #174
JohnBooty wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Correct. But - modern bombs are more powerful, but is there greater residual radioactivity?

If anything there is less. Residual radioactivity is unused explosive potential, they try to minimize that. Modern bombs are also fusion bombs which have even less radioactivity.

I wonder if there are bombs that leave more radioactivity as goodbye gift, to delay the rebuilding.

Re: Militarized Dolphins Protect Almost a Quarter of the US Nuclear Stockpile

#200

Post by chipsa »

formvoltron wrote: post #145
chipsa wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Second strike weapon. It is supposed to be able to survive someone else's first strike. First strike weapons can't survive someone else's first strike. It's part of the whole "assured destruction" thing: doesn't matter if you hit us first, you're still going to end up a self lit parking lot afterwards.

The obvious problem with mutual assured destruction is that an insane person could get ahold of the weapons, launch first, and kill all of current and future humanity. How about not strike back, just try to survive & show future generations of the world how to be. Go live in that other country that isn't radioactive.

"Mutual Assured Destruction" isn't a policy of anyone. It's a game theoretical idea that requires pre-conditions that don't necessarily apply. I mean, you hit on one of them: insane people. Most of the large nuclear powers have checks on that: the guy at the top can order the launch, but there's a bunch of relaying of the order. So the guys who turn the keys can refuse. So you need a bunch of insane people to make it happen.

And... also the Soviets once upon a time had a plan to nuke everyone, not just the US, in order to make sure that you don't have countries that build back up faster than they did. There weren't going to be any other countries that weren't radioactive.

Post reply on HN