Neil Degrasse Tyson is talking to Joe Rogan right now about Kinetic bombardment.
Probably a good time to mention "Project Thor" by the US military. The plan was to launch rods of tungsten fast enough that the explosion would be stronger than a nuclear weapon by orders of magnitude, but more importantly there is no nuclear fallout.
(((the project never happened)))
p.s. there will be extremely passionate shills in this thread denying it as if even speaking about it is retarded .... even tho the US military did
the point is that you can simulate an explosion to destroy an entire city but you don't leave the city a nuclear wasteland for hundreds of years
Owen Torres
2 replies in 5 seconds but already on page 7
fucking milo shills
Adam Price
fake news, fuck off shill
Aaron Myers
your thread is shit
Justin Myers
That site is a .mil site, as in....it's a pdf from the US military.
You are pathetic.
Benjamin Gray
of course its real. the military likely has weapon systems in space they just dont tell anybody about.
Jaxson Baker
>he believes what the military lets him know lmao!
Noah Brooks
They talked about it. That being said, you are very, very wrong about the amount of energy in the bombardment.
You won't get to even a Hiroshima sized explosion within any reasonable limitations.
I can run the math if you'd like.
Angel Butler
we know you're the same person you idiot
Nicholas Thomas
i know you're gay
Alexander Long
Please do
Wyatt Lewis
KE = 1/2mv^2
no thanks shill
Thomas Gutierrez
I'm gonna dumb this down as much as possible.
I'm am going to assume the Earth has not atmosphere, I am going to assume that any weapon released is going impact the earth at orbital velocity.
Let's assume that we have the orbital station slightly higher up than the ISS. That means that the rod will reach about 8000m/s before impact.
We will assume that the rod is about the size of a telephone pole, therefore it is about 400m^3. This is the size that the military hypothesized the weapon would be.
This means that the weapon would have a mass of roughly 8 million kg
(8000000 x 8000^2)/2 =256 billion J of energy
1 ton of TNT = 4.184x10^9 J
So you'd get roughly 62 tons of TNT put of a rod from God.
Brayden Taylor
Also, I should mention that I rounded up every number, and I left out that it would absolutely NOT impact at orbital velocity IRL due to air resistance.
So the real amount of energy is probably lower marginally than that 62 Ton number.
Brody Green
disgrace "pear shaped oblate spheroid" tison? Holy crap this guy is a star like no other at NASA
Blake Lopez
Fake News. The internet is again trying to discredit the work done by NASA scientists. SAD!
Andrew Rogers
You better read the Vedas and learn some true cosmology. Earth is flat and your ancestors knew it.
Cameron Jackson
>ctrl +f, search RODS FROM GOD >0 results
Get on /k/ faggits, get educated.
Benjamin Bell
that's literally fiction from call of duty.
Jace Nguyen
See >rod from God
Cameron Richardson
>you'll never live in a world where the Rods from God system was actually built The Cold War produced all sorts of impractical but neat weapons ideas.
Liam Gomez
>there will be extremely passionate shills in this thread denying it as if even speaking about it is retarded
damn, you called it
Aaron Russell
So that'd be close to a mini nuke or a bunker buster
Kevin Hughes
How are you going to get all that shit in space to begin with? The energy used to bring it up there would be greater than then energy it will produce. It sounds cool at first but I still think it is just a meme. Railguns on the other hand are legit and will being the military world into a pseudo battleship era.
Jaxson Foster
It'd be close to a lot of fertilizer and diesel in a big truck.
It is a meme. That's why the military discontinued it.
Jack Turner
I've also heard it referred to as the damacles system. As in the sword of damacles. I think it's more fitting than thor.
Christian Brown
reported you 2 mods take your bs over 2 x
Jacob Brown
>stronger than a nuclear weapon by orders of magnitude No it wouldn't, the reason a nuke causes so much damage is because it displaces a large amount of air very quickly and give off a tremendous amount of heat and radiation. A rod of steel that you could realistically get into orbit would do about as much damage as a powerful bunker buster at orbital velocity. That is if you could hit a building sized target with an unguided bomb form orbit.
Samuel King
Post a link to the relevant Nail DaGrease discussion.
Chase Murphy
your forgetting the most important factor in your "equation"
ITS GOING MACH FUCKING 20
Angel Wilson
>The plan was to launch rods of tungsten fast enough that the explosion would be stronger than a nuclear weapon by orders of magnitude >orders of magnitude
let's say the U.S send up a dozen telephone pole size tungsten rods and dropped them on Earth would that actually be more powerful than a small atom bomb like Little Boy??
somehow I don't think so.
Xavier Barnes
What?
Max orbital velocity would be 8000m/s.
Are you retarded?
Benjamin Barnes
I heard the point was when it hit the ground the speed and heat caused from its velocity would ignite the air. Basically a giant thermobaric bomb. It's not about the blunt force trauma it causes so much as the fact the heat vaporises everything.
Carter Torres
Where do you think they got the idea from dumbass
Cameron Ortiz
>fake and gay...plasma laser tech is the next phase of warfare...didn't you cunts ever see a bond movie.
Hunter Sanchez
>The plan was to launch rods of tungsten fast enough that the explosion would be stronger than a nuclear weapon by orders of magnitude
Assuming your rods are achieving 0.1 c, sure.
Adrian Watson
8000m/s is around Mach 23.
also by your number of 8 million kilograms is insane, how the fuck would they even get this weapon system into space in the first place
Aiden Hughes
You don't have to think anything. I already crunched the numbers.
They don't come close.
Luke Sullivan
What if had rocket boosters and was guided, like a guided asteroid
Owen Anderson
If this is the case, once completed, they would no doubt be used immediately in ww3. Cool thrad user, looks like there is even more reason to avoid conflict, course those jews and CIAniggers are trying hard for it.
Elijah Edwards
Mine it on the moon. Ride it to orbit on cosmonauts' farts. Meanwhile you've been accelerating almost all the way thanks to gravity.
Josiah Campbell
>when people are not aware of military testing to arm destroyers with railguns that are capable of firing projectiles at mach 14 arching outside of the atmosphere and hitting targets in excess of 2,000 miles Railguns are weapons of the future, not stupid lasers. Shooting a piece of metallic rock at mach 20 requires exponential magnitudes less energy than a laser that can burn through a tank.
Jeremiah Thomas
No. Otherwise we would have the atmosphere exploding every time a satellite broke up in the atmosphere.
Yeah, he said >you for got... MACH FUCKING 20 and I pointed out that I literally said it was going well over Mach 20.
8 million kgs is roughly the mass of a telephone pole of tungsten. It is completely logically infeasible.
Angel Morris
Look up Relativistic kill vehicle. Life is just irrelevant because people are too stupid to see the big picture. it's only a matter of time, people. Get used to life while it lasts.
Owen James
That was literally a CoD campaign.
Gavin Carter
That's not how railguns work.
Railguns still have a lot of tweaking before they are really viable. They're getting there, though.
Mason Garcia
Wasn't the explosion in China a year ago from a Tungsten rod?
Aaron King
The rod and the ring will strike?
Jacob Martin
where im from everyone knows about rods from god
Jaxon Brooks
It was literally a movie.. >G.I Joe Retaliation OP is LARPing fool.
Tyler Gray
>The plan was to launch rods of tungsten fast enough that the explosion would be stronger than a nuclear weapon by orders of magnitude, but more importantly there is no nuclear fallout. >the explosion would be stronger than a nuclear weapon by orders of magnitude No, no just fucking no. You're full of shit. They were meant for good penetration. Bunker busting and what not. Not great for even just leveling a city block let alone a city.
Adam Green
>GI Jew
Alright lad. Gonna have to put you down.
Wyatt Miller
That was the plot of the G. I. Joe movie
Mason Sanchez
RKVs need to be going a significant percentage of the speed of light, somewhere well over the .003% the speed of light that these rods would go.
RKVs in theory need to be going well over 1% to be viable.
Jayden Turner
Who said anything about us doing it to ourselves? I'm talking about an alien civilization with the ability to launch a house sized object with rockets able to achieve these speeds into the Earth.
Ethan Garcia
Powering electro magnets does require EXPONENTIALLY less energy than lasers even at our technological standards. >inb4 you tell me they are testing lasers at DARPA and multiple military installations They have railgun testing in Virginia capable of obliterating a city block. They are simply testing for consistency and energy consumption. You are not going to find destroyer class level lasers being tested at any military installation.
Owen Diaz
autists being autistic
Matthew Carter
>not stupid lasers.
They're planning to have lasers too. IIRC a ship already got one years ago.
Nolan Brooks
whats this then?
Adam Wright
>"Project Thor" Aka: Rods from God
Jackson Clark
For targeting the tips of missile payloads sure.
Henry Cox
>Not using catalog
How do you even live?
Ethan Long
Didn't that Sup Forums prophecy have something about a lightning bolt will strike and not kill?
Jordan Martinez
Like how both Hiroshima and Nagasaki are uninhabitable blasted wastelands today?
I bet you think uranium glows green, and that you'll mutate if exposed to the fallout.
Lincoln Lewis
>The plan was to launch rods of tungsten fast enough that the explosion would be stronger than a nuclear weapon
Why tho?
Jaxon White
Using the catalog doesn't stop people from posting stuff and sliding your thread. I'm talking about other people browsing you fucking moron.
Christopher Adams
To add onto that CRAM's abilities to shoot a gorillion bullets into the sky with infrared scanning has proven to be massively effective since the early 90's. Lasers require a much higher precision rate.
Michael Cooper
BUT
if the tech was perfected, then you could bring one down on the Kremlin and deny any involvement
Tyler King
There is a professor at Ole Miss that worked on this shit and writes about spaced based weapons platforms and shit. I forget his name he has been on a few talk shows before. Anyone familiar with him? Seems to fit this subject.
Parker Reed
They literally are being tested.
Railguns have been in development for over a decade.
They DO NOT have the potential to level city blocks, they have WAY less energy than rods from God, and even those don't level city blocks.
While they require less energy overall, they require more energy at once, which means huge capacitor banks, which take a lot of time to charge and currently aren't installed on warships.
Not to mention that the max barrel life of a railgun has been significantly EXTENDED to about 40 rounds.
If you plan on firing hundreds of rounds on a single deployment, you need a lot of barrels, huge capacitor banks, and a large power plant, as well as enough techs to replace these barrels constantly.
Not to mention that guns on ships are nearly obsolete, missiles do everything guns do but much better. Even the range of railguns pale in comparison to even last gen missiles.
Nathaniel Sullivan
>Make orbital weapons >Point them at ourselves.
Humans
Alexander Butler
This thread is retarded. The conspiracy that any Swiss company assisted in developing this feverdream weapon is absolutely insane!
Jayden Cruz
But what if you somehow fit a nuke in the tube and launched it, so it would be a virtually undetectable nuke?
Charles Turner
>wow like why can't we just like all get along man
David Nguyen
Also would it be cheaper if we thruster a small asteroid at our enemies?
Jonathan Powell
>The plan was to launch rods of tungsten fast enough that the explosion would be stronger than a nuclear weapon by orders of magnitude, but more importantly there is no nuclear fallout.
that sounds pretty fucking cool
Brody Cox
There is a difference between a hydrogen bomb and an atomic bomb.
The first atomic bomb was equivalent to 20,000 tons of TNT. The first hydrogen bomb was equivalent of 10 million tons of TNT.
HURRR DURURR YOU KNOW SCIENCE THO SPORT
Brandon Wilson
Russia has already scrapped their early warning satellites. They couldn't maintain them post Soviet collapse, which means that a nuke would be undetectable anyway until impact.
Not to mention that Russia has backups and is decentralized just like the US, they would retaliate.
Also, they have ground based observatories. If terrorists in Libya can track our spy sats thousands of of kms above the earth, Russia can track something hundreds of kms up.
You guys have no idea how any of this works, trust me.
Luke Reyes
The rod and the ring will strike.
A killing bolt will shine in the night for all to see but not kill.
>rod and ring are the components of thermonuclear and nuclear explosives (ring is fission detonation first stage and rod is the fissile sparkplug plus fuel for the fusion second stage) >killing bolt is a mystery
Hudson Davis
Keep me posted when lasers can engage in excess of of 200 miles. Nuclear destroyers and further improvement are the solution. There is a pretty solid reason why lasers aren't looked at as the next best large scale offensive weapon but rather a defensive solution to incoming fire with sensitive computer guided munitions.
Jackson Lee
whats this then?
Nicholas Davis
No, it would be immediately detectable. Not to mention that the only lyrics reason weapons aren't in space is the treaty that the US enforces. There is a whole can of worms there.
Nukes do it faster, cheaper, and more accurately.
Lincoln Jackson
We just need to perfect coil guns, somehow.. someway.. we can call them MACs, mass accelerator cannons. Load them up with 9 meter long tungstun round, build our navy ships around them, and blast our enemies into dust.
Aiden Roberts
Hydrogen bombs airbursted over targets are magnitudes more clean than the original fatman and little boy.
Look up the Rule of Seven, any major blast will be more or less safe after a week.
Levi Ortiz
Nukes are also very detectable. A RKV is not.
Luis Ross
Yes, a hydrogen bomb is fundamentally different from a fission bomb. In a way that makes you absolutely retarded for imagining a radioactive wasteland that lasts for even a decade.
Holy fucking shit this is the most autistic mix of ignorance and arrogance I have seen. You're full of shit on that too moron. Larger bombs create LESS radioactive waste (compared to their mass) and launch a large part of it in the upper atmosphere. You've been BTFO once and you still have the arrogance to post like that again? Is flint's water to blame for this?
Christopher James
>small satellite burning up in the atmosphere is the same as a 20m tungsten Rod striking the earth.
Good physics buddy.
Adrian Parker
They were never looked at as offers I've weapons. They are point defense weapons to replace CIWS like Goalkeeper.
You need to actually read things before you make arguments you know nothing about.
Jacob Thompson
The only future application of such a weapon would be accelerating asteroids or other debris to near-relativistic speeds which is a cheap and easy method of planet killing, even from far away and without any option for deterrent or any possibility of defense from it
Samuel Lewis
holy fucking shit every leaf in this thread has been wrong and keeps posting
Blake Walker
>We will assume that the rod is about the size of a telephone pole, therefore it is about 400m^3.
400 cubic meters is the size of a telephone poll to you?
The largest wood telephone pole is a Class 1. Taking it at max size it has a circumference of 43.5inches and call it 40 feet in length.
To convert: 1.1049m circumference 12.192m length. Total area 13.47m^3 Now I'm using WC or tungsten carbide which has a density of 15.63 g/cm^3 or 15630kg/m^3
15630 x 13.47 = 210,536kg
LEO orbit is just under 8000m/s
The answer comes out to 1.61kt.
Which is a lot.
Camden Bell
A rail gun is not a coil gun! Rails are damaged every time its used, and require regular replacement because they warp. A coil is not. >mass Magnetic*
Andrew Cook
>what is chernobyl
Adrian Scott
So they are not only being tested large scale but have surpassed lasers in point defense with current tech requiring less energy. Thanks my senpai