JohnnyBoyC
Mar 5 2006, 09:48 PM
Is this for real?
ClickPlease move if in the wrong section
Otacon
Mar 5 2006, 09:54 PM
Makes the .38 revolver I own seem pretty weak....
punish3ment
Mar 5 2006, 10:05 PM
I saw that Video In a Documentry about atomic Bombs, it is very real!
Raptor
Mar 5 2006, 11:54 PM
That's real. That video was taken many years ago, the nuclear weapons we have now are no doubt much more powerful than the one in that video.
RamboIII
Mar 5 2006, 11:58 PM
Yeah the ones we can create now are capable of tearing sky scrapers apart:
here for more info
angrycrustacean
Mar 6 2006, 11:09 PM
Even the lowly bomb in that video could tear a skyscraper apart. A modern one could probably wipe out at least 10 blocks of skyscrapers.
Otacon
Mar 6 2006, 11:14 PM
Thats why ya gotta live in your own bomb shelter!
Stellar
Mar 6 2006, 11:46 PM
Can anyone explain to me why, in the middle of all that destruction, the camera survived?
et's daddy
Mar 7 2006, 12:01 AM
QUOTE(Stellar @ Mar 6 2006, 06:46 PM) [snapback]1092243[/snapback]
Can anyone explain to me why, in the middle of all that destruction, the camera survived?
because it wasnt real
Odinson
Mar 7 2006, 03:46 AM
QUOTE(Stellar @ Mar 6 2006, 06:46 PM) [snapback]1092243[/snapback]
Can anyone explain to me why, in the middle of all that destruction, the camera survived?
The zoom. I think they zoomed in from afar.
Anyway, they tested the effects of the Nuke on pigs. Not the explosion itself, but the effects of the radiation. It was a horrible death. The pigs' intestines were bursting out of their bellies. That's all I could remember of that vid.
Stellar
Mar 7 2006, 03:51 AM
QUOTE
The zoom.
You're kidding, right?
Odinson
Mar 7 2006, 03:55 AM
QUOTE(Stellar @ Mar 6 2006, 10:51 PM) [snapback]1092664[/snapback]
You're kidding, right?
I edited the post. Sorry. The black and white stuff is real. The part with the trees has been around forever. There is also some footage of the blast devastating a house. The black and white stuff is real.
Zooming is the only way I can expalin how the got the footage without damaging the camera.
Glacies
Mar 7 2006, 03:59 AM
QUOTE(RamboIII @ Mar 5 2006, 03:58 PM) [snapback]1091236[/snapback]
Yeah the ones we can create now are capable of tearing sky scrapers apart:
here for more infodid your link lead us to google on purpose? wouldn't saying "search for it on google" have been easier?
i always thought the buildings and the cars were fake, cause they moved so easily, but then i learned about the awesome power of a nuke, and it's scary to look at it again.
I posted this on another nuke thread somewhere...but here it is again. Actually I think this link gives you several different nuclear explosions. The difference between these and the nukes we have today are about equal to a firecracker vs a stick of dynamite. But you get the idea.
Nuclear ExplosionsAlso this one is pretty cool...the music and all...
Nuclear Explosion with eery music
Odinson
Mar 7 2006, 04:03 AM
http://www.ifilm.com/ifilmdetail/2665581?refsite=7063&ns=1Underground Nuke explosion.
QUOTE
This footage is from a November 6, 1971 underground test of a 5 megaton Spartan ABM (anti-ballistic missle) warhead. The $200 million dollar test was conducted at Cannikan, Alaska on the island of Amchitka, in the Aluetian chain (the test was considered too risky for the Nevada test range and the Pentagon wanted a more remote location.) The warhead was placed in a 50 foot diameter chamber 5875 feet below the surface and even at that depth it caused the earth to ripple 25 feet and registered a 6.8 - 7.0 on the Richter scale. More info on this blast: www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/systems/w71.htm
http://www.ifilm.com/posts/list/10332.page
Imaginary Friend
Mar 7 2006, 04:32 AM
This video link was posted in the Media forum:
Mushroom Musical
ex infernis
Mar 7 2006, 04:39 AM
QUOTE(JohnnyBoyC @ Mar 5 2006, 02:48 PM) [snapback]1091059[/snapback]
Is this for real?
ClickPlease move if in the wrong section
It's real and i thinks it's called a Nuclear cannon
RabidCat
Mar 7 2006, 07:30 PM
Those of us who are members of the "baby boom", or who were born shortly thereafter, 1945 until about 1950 should remember this composite (the link).
Yes. There were nuclear cannons; this one was tested at the White Sands nuke facility, if I remember correctly. Also, it seems to me it was something between 10 and 25 kilotons, as a field weapon. The cameras survived simply because they were a very lon ways away, and/or in the case of the Willys (jeep) and the house, etc., the cameras were remotes installed in bunkers. The tests were real, and many were conducted above ground in New Mexico and Nevada. The most powerful (most were either used or destroyed as being impractical, replaced with multiple warhead missiles) were the hydrogen series, and nearly utterly destroyed places like the Bikini Atoll along with the test installations/ships towed there for the purpose.
Anyone who has seen a nuclear explosion cannot doubt the power of same. Hiroshima/Nagasaki were firecrackers compared to later weapons. I was military during a sea test of a surface nuke, and also an anti-sub nuke. Either of those is quite convincing that the US and the USSR could have destroyed life on this planet. Think of it this way: there was a combined total of nearly 100,000 10 megaton warheads at one point, with less than half of those being capable of causing a nuclear winter had that many been launched. As a young person in the '50s, we were drilled in diving under desks, radiation protection, etc and so forth, and we lived under the "nuclear umbrella" for a couple of decades. Many of us participated in the development/testing of those devices.
Yes, we still have them, but living in a world that seemed to be constantly threatened was not a lot of fun. To have a maniac dictator (Stalin) on one side of the world, and a crew of paranoid military people on the other seemed to me, at the time, that I would never reach the end of the century alive.
Yes, folks, it was all too real. Consider yourselves lucky to even be asking the question if it was real.
Chokmah
Mar 7 2006, 10:49 PM
launching an atomic bomb out of a cannon seems really really stupid, or is that just me?
angrycrustacean
Mar 7 2006, 11:03 PM
More like artillery than a cannon, a cannon generally implies a smaller launcher. The one in the video launched it a hell of a long ways, so it could be useful with lower-powered nukes, to clear out an enemy's frontlines from afar, even if that enemy had air superiority.
et's daddy
Mar 7 2006, 11:07 PM
i spent years as a mechanic in Howitzer units, they shoot over 20 miles
__Kratos__
Mar 8 2006, 01:16 AM
QUOTE(Stellar @ Mar 6 2006, 05:46 PM) [snapback]1092243[/snapback]
Can anyone explain to me why, in the middle of all that destruction, the camera survived?
A protective bunker around the camera maybe?
Otacon
Mar 8 2006, 01:21 AM
I've never understood why those cameras survived either, unless they had a live feed going on and those cameras were also destroyed...?
Could they even do that though back in those days?
Chokmah
Mar 8 2006, 10:25 PM
QUOTE(angrycrustacean @ Mar 7 2006, 11:03 PM) [snapback]1093781[/snapback]
More like artillery than a cannon, a cannon generally implies a smaller launcher. The one in the video launched it a hell of a long ways, so it could be useful with lower-powered nukes, to clear out an enemy's frontlines from afar, even if that enemy had air superiority.
ah, but still, it still seems really stupid... what if it exploded in the cannon, or something.
Odinson
Mar 9 2006, 08:25 AM
QUOTE(Otacon @ Mar 7 2006, 08:21 PM) [snapback]1094059[/snapback]
I've never understood why those cameras survived either, unless they had a live feed going on and those cameras were also destroyed...?
Could they even do that though back in those days?
Did they have "zoom" back then?
Bahamut_0
Mar 9 2006, 10:51 AM
I wonder what would happen if the projectile launched by one of those canons would hit something in mid air (like a plane for example)...
Bigfoot_Is_Real
Mar 10 2006, 01:30 AM
that would funny if it hit a bird and exploded
RamboIII
Mar 10 2006, 01:33 AM
i think we need to take one of those and stick right up irans a*s!
Bigfoot_Is_Real
Mar 10 2006, 01:34 AM
well considering it would only leave a bad scar consider to modern nukes i say we dont because that would make WWIII
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please
click here.