Nuclear Weapons. [Archive] - Military Photos

M4ko

04-06-2005, 11:09 PM

If you would like post anything here, preferbly images, related to nuclear warfare.

Russian Nuclear Forces

For now im posting images of Topol-M (SS-27). SS-27 Mobile complexes have just been started to be deployed. These are 5th generation missiles. Currently in testing is another improved modification of Topol-M called Bulava. Also another missile has been reported recently to be in developemnt which will not be stopped by any anti missle defence.

http://img60.exs.cx/img60/5992/ss250011to.jpg

http://img217.exs.cx/img217/5483/ss250026sl.jpg

http://img217.exs.cx/img217/3369/topolm20ks.png

http://img236.exs.cx/img236/4610/tyjuyt2xk.png

http://img236.exs.cx/img236/3253/topolm48hr.png

http://img236.exs.cx/img236/3011/topolm36fx.png

http://bfo.no/images/uploads/TOPOL_M_raketten.jpg

http://img142.exs.cx/img142/7331/topolmtruckverticalbg8pp.jpg

http://img142.exs.cx/img142/8175/image657998x7ww.jpg

Silo based Topol-M

http://img142.exs.cx/img142/2615/terazije135bt.jpg

http://img142.exs.cx/img142/741/ruicbmsolid7wh.gif

VIDEO

there are virtualy no videos of Topol Mobile Complexes, but here is a every nice demonstration - the only one i could find. Takes a while to load.
http://legion.wplus.net/vid.shtml?img=/guide/army/rk/rs12m1-4.wmv&alt=Подвижный%20грунтовый%20ракетный%20комплекс%20РС-12М1%20«Тополь-М»

Russian-built Bushehr, Iranian Nuclear Reactor

http://img217.exs.cx/img217/4748/3003383pe.jpg
http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/world/iran/images/ikonos_bushehr_010_01.jpg

jetsetter

04-06-2005, 11:27 PM

Russian "reports" on their weapon capabilities are not worth the paper they are printed on.

Pandy

04-06-2005, 11:33 PM

Doesn't matter, if Russia and US go at it, I'm getting the **** out the city... if I have a change.

Plus, to my knowledge, US hasn't tested any anti-missile tech yet on ICBMs... therefore, we'll never know if it can be stop or not.

jmatucd

04-06-2005, 11:34 PM

... he didn't bother printing it on any paper lol

digital storage is cheap nowadays 0.01 cents to store that. You know, several rubbles and what not ;) (jk)

enjoy your economy, waves from Poland (really from the United States, but who is counting what)

Misanthrope

04-06-2005, 11:37 PM

Russian "reports" on their weapon capabilities are not worth the paper they are printed on.
I disagree. NATO had a fairly rude awaking when, for example, it got its hands on some Kontakt-5.

That said, I do find the claim that a conventional missile could defeat "any" anti-missile system to be rather suspect.

Pandy

04-06-2005, 11:43 PM

The 14 Trident II SSBNs carry together around 50 percent of total U.S. strategic warheads. (The exact number varies in an unpredictable and highly classified manner below a maximum set by various strategic arms limitation treaties.) Although the missiles have no pre-set targets when the submarine goes on patrol, the SSBNs are capable of rapidly targeting their missiles should the need arise, using secure and constant at-sea communications links. The Ohio class are the largest submarines ever built for the U.S. Navy, and are second only to the Russian Typhoon class in mass and size. A single submarine carries the destructive power more than nine times greater than all Allied ordnance dropped in the European theater in World War II.

The Ohio class submarines are specifically designed for extended deterrent patrols. To decrease the time in port for crew turnover and replenishment, three large logistics hatches are fitted to provide large diameter resupply and repair openings. These hatches allow sailors to rapidly transfer supply pallets, equipment replacement modules and machinery components, significantly reducing the time required for replenishment and maintenance. The class design and modern main concepts allow the submarines to operate for 15+ years between overhauls.

14 nuclear-powered SSBNs, each armed with 24 Trident II SLBMs; they are also known as "Trident" submarines, and provide the sea-based leg of the triad of the United States strategic deterrent forces

4 nuclear-powered SSGNs, each armed with 154 Tomahawk cruise missiles with conventional warheads

The first eight Ohio class submarines were originally equipped with 24 Trident I C-4 ballistic missiles. Beginning with the ninth Trident submarine, USS Tennessee, the remaining ships were equipped with the upgraded Trident II D-5 variant as they were constructed. Trident II can deliver significantly more payload than Trident I and more accurately. Starting with Alaska in 2000, conversion of the remaining C-4 equipped submarines to D-5 is currently underway.

The first eight boats were homeported in Bangor, Washington to replace the Polaris A-3 carrying submarines that were then being decommissioned. The remaining ten boats were originally homeported in Kings Bay, Georgia, replacing the Atlantic-based Poseidon and Trident Backfit submarines. During the conversion of the first four hulls to SSGNs, (see below) three boats, Pennsylvania, Kentucky, and Nebraska, were shifted from Kings Bay to Bangor. Further shifts are occurring as the strategic needs of the US change.

Original plans called for Ohio to be retired in 2002, followed by three of her sisters. However, Ohio, Michigan, Florida, and Georgia will be modified and remain in service as conventional guided missile submarines (SSGNs).

Beginning in 2007–2010, 22 of the 24 88-inch diameter Trident missile tubes will be modified to contain large vertical launch systems (VLS), one configuration of which will be a cluster of seven Tomahawk missiles. If the maximum of 154 Tomahawks were loaded, one Ohio-class SSGN would carry an entire Battle Group's equivalent of cruise missiles. Other payload possibilities include new generations of supersonic and hypersonic cruise missiles, unmanned air vehicles (UAVs), the ADM-160 Miniature Air-Launched Decoy, sensors for anti-submarine warfare or intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance missions, counter-mine warfare payloads such as the AN/BLQ-11 Long Term Mine Reconnaissance System (LMRS), and the broaching univeral buoyant launcher (BUBL) and stealthy affordable capsule system (SACS) specialized payload canisters.

The other two Trident tubes will be replaced by swimmer lockout and equipment pods. For special operations, a minisub will be mounted on the bow and the boat will be able to transport around a hundred Navy SEALs or other Special Operations Forces; such a large team of special forces is not expected to be frequently needed, however.

On September 26, 2002, the Navy awarded GD Electric Boat a more than $442.9 million contract to begin the first phase of the SSGN submarine conversion program. Those funds cover only the initial phase of conversion for the first two boats on the schedule. Advance procurement has been funded at $355 million in fiscal year 2002, US$825 million in the FY2003 budget and, through the five-year defense budget plan, at $936 million in FY2004, $505 million in FY2005, and $170 million in FY2006. Thus, the total cost to refit the four boats is just under $700 million per boat.

In November 2002 Ohio entered drydock, beginning a 36-month refueling and conversion overhaul. She is scheduled to rejoin the fleet in 2007, followed by Michigan, Florida, and Georgia. These four SSGNs are expected to remain in service until 2023-2026.

-------------------------------------------------------

Builders: GD Electric Boat
Power plant: One S8G nuclear reactor, one shaft
Length: 170.69 m (560 ft)
Beam: 12.8 m (42 ft)
Displacement: 17,033 tons surfaced; 19,000 tons submerged
Speed: 20 knot (37 km/h)
Crew: 15 officers, 140 enlisted
SSBN configuration: 24 tubes for Trident I and II ballistic missiles; the Trident II with a length of 13.4 metres just fits vertically (the Trident I is shorter), and they are placed in two rows of twelve and four torpedo tubes; Mk-48 torpedoes, mobile submarine simulator decoys
SSGN configuration: 154 tubes for Tomahawk cruise missiles, Two swimmer and equipment lock-out tubes, and Four torpedo tubes; Mk-48 torpedoes, mobile submarine simulator decoys

http://198.65.138.161/wmd/systems/images/ssbn726.jpg

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/6/66/OHIOSSGNCONVERSION.JPG

http://www.benrud.net/student/pinback/assets/content/sea/ssbn730-p01.jpg

http://198.65.138.161/wmd/systems/images/ohio-dvic115.jpg

http://198.65.138.161/wmd/systems/images/ssbn-726-dnst8201336.jpg

http://198.65.138.161/wmd/systems/images/740-p02.jpg

http://198.65.138.161/wmd/systems/images/ssbn-726_030814-n-0000x-002.jpg

http://198.65.138.161/wmd/systems/images/740-p01.jpg

Marmot1

04-07-2005, 03:53 AM

Russian "reports" on their weapon capabilities are not worth the paper they are printed on.

And the same goes to every treaty signed with Russia/Soviet Union rofl

Scottie

04-07-2005, 04:37 AM

ban russia they have nukes..

ban america they also have nukes :bash:

Uhlan

04-07-2005, 05:53 AM

http://img236.exs.cx/img236/4610/tyjuyt2xk.png

This huge yellow dildo scares the bejesus out of me!

Mr. HAXEP

04-07-2005, 10:38 AM

Russian "reports" on their weapon capabilities are not worth the paper they are printed on.

And why USA and Israel don't want that Russial to sell Iskander to Sirya? Maybe They know more than you?

Andreas

04-07-2005, 11:35 AM

Hey this is a good thread, please keep it going. I always fancied pics of giant russian nuclear subs.
http://submarine.id.ru/galery/t1.jpg
http://submarine.id.ru/galery/t15.jpg
http://submarine.id.ru/galery/t16.jpg
Im thinking red oktober...
http://submarine.id.ru/galery/t65.jpg
http://submarine.id.ru/galery/t81.jpg
http://submarine.id.ru/galery/t239.jpg
http://submarine.id.ru/galery/t600.jpg
http://submarine.id.ru/galery/t610.jpg
http://submarine.id.ru/galery/t699.jpg
http://submarine.id.ru/galery/t887.jpg
Fatboy
http://submarine.id.ru/galery/t888.jpg
http://www.submarine.id.ru/galery/t1380.jpg

Cheers Andreas

platform389

04-07-2005, 11:56 AM

Teheran, Mecca,Bejing, or Moscow, this will do them just fine.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v414/h18w777/Single_W87_Minuteman3.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v414/h18w777/MMIII_MIRV.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v414/h18w777/MM_blast_lock_pizza.jpg

B-61 "Dial-A-Yield" gravity weapon.

http://nuclearweaponarchive.org/Usa/Weapons/B61clr.jpg

W-80 ALCM intermediate yield

http://nuclearweaponarchive.org/Usa/Weapons/W80b.jpg
Good things come in small packages. Just the ticket for Osama or downtown Mecca...
http://nuclearweaponarchive.org/Usa/Weapons/W80handle.jpg
B-83 High Yield Moscow Urban Renewal Device or Teheran Raghead Oven Roaster..Dial A Yield for those special friends
http://nuclearweaponarchive.org/Usa/Weapons/B83component.jpg

Weasel

04-07-2005, 12:00 PM

Russian-built Bushehr, Iranian Nuclear Reactor

http://img217.exs.cx/img217/4748/3003383pe.jpg
http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/world/iran/images/siemens_pwr_isar_2.jpg

Russian? Iranian? Please don´t bomb this!

He219

04-07-2005, 12:11 PM

LOL, Isar 1 & 2; that's outside of München!

M4ko

04-07-2005, 01:07 PM

LOL, Isar 1 & 2; that's outside of München!

Your right i was on the wrong page on globalsec.org when i was copying Bushehr pics, ill fix this up.

M4ko

04-07-2005, 01:19 PM

Russian? Iranian? Please don´t bomb this!

Russians had a contract with Iranians to install near the reactor TOR and S-300 surface to air missile installations, not sure if they have been deployed there yet or not.

Legion

04-07-2005, 01:47 PM

http://submarine.id.ru/galery/t239.jpg

It's almost hard to believe there is enough ocean to hide that big bastard in.

Inconnu

04-07-2005, 02:02 PM

France :

Le redoutable
http://www.netmarine.net/bat/smarins/redoutab/photo20.jpg
http://www.netmarine.net/bat/smarins/redoutab/photo47.jpg
http://www.netmarine.net/bat/smarins/redoutab/photo05.jpg

Sabre

04-07-2005, 03:33 PM

I think the last thing I would ever want to do would be to serve on one of those beasts.

You spend half the year underwater moving at walking pace, having minimal contact with your family, not even being allowed to know what your mission is or where you are.

When you finally get to do your job, you know that when you surface, there will be f*** all left of anything...because of you. :|

I'll take my hole in the ground and full-body-condom anytime a nuclear war kicks off!

M4ko

04-07-2005, 11:45 PM

Some images that i scraped off google.

Russian arctic silo

http://img179.exs.cx/img179/7364/466371silo3004ho.jpg

Mobile ss-25. Late 80s early 90's judging by the banner in the background.

http://img179.exs.cx/img179/3389/ss253yh.jpg
SSX14

http://img179.exs.cx/img179/5347/ssx140wf.jpg

King Bomb

http://img179.exs.cx/img179/6341/tsar3ps.jpg

http://img179.exs.cx/img179/9135/muzeum1lo.jpg

US Peacekeeper I believe

http://img179.exs.cx/img179/5853/dod000082cf.jpg

http://img179.exs.cx/img179/9106/pkeep6dg.gif

B2 drops a bunkerbuster

http://img179.exs.cx/img179/529/b2dropsbunkerbuster5ox.jpg

http://img179.exs.cx/img179/8803/tblgblimpnukelg4nt.jpg

nuke silo

http://img179.exs.cx/img179/553/nuke5144vo.jpg

Nuclear Bomb

http://img179.exs.cx/img179/6190/nuke1jh.jpg

Nuclear Reactor

http://img179.exs.cx/img179/9981/oswegonukevessel540fz.jpg

Turbo

04-07-2005, 11:58 PM

Andreas, thanks for the typhoon pics been wanting some for awhile, nice pics woot

Evil_Avatar

04-07-2005, 11:59 PM

Politics is male game. The goverment with bigger "missile" wins. ***** envy.

Thank you.

Freud has left the building.

M4ko

04-07-2005, 11:59 PM

Nuclear Explosions
They look so beautiful

http://img179.exs.cx/img179/4583/toma21xf.jpg

http://img179.exs.cx/img179/6272/toma56xd.jpg

http://img179.exs.cx/img179/6751/ivymike87eg.jpg

http://img179.exs.cx/img179/3998/n228lo.jpg

http://img179.exs.cx/img179/9811/atombombexplosion4zh.jpg

http://img179.exs.cx/img179/8745/cromeo11px.jpg

http://img179.exs.cx/img179/8467/crossbaker84dl.jpg

http://img179.exs.cx/img179/9136/storaxsedan28zh.jpg

http://img179.exs.cx/img179/3/ukclimax1a7pk.jpg

http://img179.exs.cx/img179/7763/10ap1.jpg

http://img179.exs.cx/img179/2457/253ba.jpg

http://img179.exs.cx/img179/3498/344ml.jpg

http://img179.exs.cx/img179/3048/00156bb.jpg

http://img147.exs.cx/img147/4015/abx1cs.jpg

http://img147.exs.cx/img147/5539/abm1bh.jpg

http://img179.exs.cx/img179/1227/rds9jo.jpg

M4ko

04-08-2005, 12:11 AM

Politics is male game. The goverment with bigger "missile" wins. ***** envy.

Thank you.

Freud has left the building.

I was going to say same thing in reply to this guy :)

http://img236.exs.cx/img236/4610/tyjuyt2xk.png

This huge yellow dildo scares the bejesus out of me!

el_kab0ng

04-08-2005, 12:21 AM

n/m

Evil_Avatar

04-08-2005, 12:24 AM

Hey, don't worry M4ko. I like ... um... your "missile". The one on your avatar. :D

M4ko

04-08-2005, 12:29 AM

Hey, don't worry M4ko. I like ... um... your "missile". The one on your avatar. :D

waht should i worry about? and yes my missile is very nice, comes in handy from time to time. :)

M4ko

04-08-2005, 01:30 AM

Russian strategic bomber TU-160 (Nato: Black Jack) Designed and deployed since the 70's. Very classic look; it looks good even today. Ive posted these pics in another, older thread.

http://img82.exs.cx/img82/4106/tu160przekrojm4uq.jpg
http://img82.exs.cx/img82/4738/tu160model9ex.jpg
http://img82.exs.cx/img82/8417/tu1602yd.jpg
http://img82.exs.cx/img82/4535/btu160p03l9qo.jpg
http://img82.exs.cx/img82/7272/tu16011sl.jpg
http://img82.exs.cx/img82/8017/tu160s3yw.jpg
http://img82.exs.cx/img82/9418/tu16045ga.jpg
Bomb hanger
http://img82.exs.cx/img82/5708/tu160ch55400zs.jpg

Sayeret

04-08-2005, 02:18 AM

http://submarine.id.ru/galery/t888.jpg

Pretty amazing to think that one of these submarines alone, can practically destroy a country.

Sayeret

04-08-2005, 02:39 AM

surface-to-surface

Davy Crockett Launcher

http://www.guntruck.com/Resources/W54davy1.jpg
http://www.guntruck.com/Resources/M28DavyTripod.jpeg
http://www.guntruck.com/Resources/davy1.jpg
http://www.guntruck.com/Resources/DavyCrockettM29.jpg
http://www.guntruck.com/Resources/smallboy.jpg
http://www.guntruck.com/DavyCrockett.html

hypothetical nuclear suitcase
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/f/f5/Suitcasebomb.jpg

air-to-air

http://www.wsmr-history.org/Photos/ParkPhotos/Genie.jpg

http://www.wsmr-history.org/Photos/Two.jpg

This air-to-air unguided rocket was designed to carry a nuclear warhead. It was carried by the F-106 and F-101. It was capable of accelerating to a speed of Mach 3 because of its 36,000 pound thrust rocket engine. U.S. Air Force

Length: 9 feet
Diameter: 17 inches
Weight: 800 pounds
Propellant: Solid
Range: 6 miles
First Firing: 1956

www.wsmr-history.org/ genie.htm

Surface-to-air

Nike Hercules

http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/usa/airdef/nike_herc_17.jpg
http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/usa/airdef/nike-hercules01.jpg

As the Nike Ajax system underwent testing during the early 1950s, the Army became concerned that the missile was incapable of stopping a massed Soviet air attack. To enhance the missile’s capabilities, the Army explored the feasibility of equipping Ajax with a nuclear warhead, but when that proved impractical, in July 1953 the service authorized development of a second generation surface-to-air missile, the Nike Hercules. As with Nike Ajax, Western Electric was the primary contractor with Bell Telephone Laboratories providing the guidance systems and Douglas Aircraft serving as the major subcontractor for the airframe

http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/usa/airdef/nike-hercules.htm

SLBMs

http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/usa/slbm/comp_02.gif
http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/usa/slbm/comp_03.gif

Polaris A1
http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/usa/slbm/a1_4.jpg

Poseidon C3
http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/usa/slbm/c3_daso.jpg
http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/usa/slbm/c3-DFST8302546_JPG.jpg

Strategic Bombers

B-36 Peacemaker

http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/usa/bomber/b-36-1949.jpg
http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/usa/bomber/b-36-clouds.jpg

B-70 Valkyrie

http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/usa/bomber/b-70-ecn-1814.jpg
http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/usa/bomber/e-16695.jpg

Weapons delivery
The term strategic nuclear weapons is generally used to denote large weapons which would be used to destroy large targets, such as cities. Tactical nuclear weapons are smaller weapons used to destroy specific military, communications, or infrastructure targets. By modern standards, the bombs that destroyed Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945 may perhaps be considered tactical weapons (with yields between 13 and 22 kilotons (54 to 92 TJ)), although modern tactical weapons are considerably lighter and more compact.

Basic methods of delivery for nuclear weapons are:

[edit]
Gravity bombs
No nuclear weapon qualifies as a "wooden bomb" - US slang for one trouble-free, maintenance-free, and danger-free under all conditions. This method of delivery requires that the weapon be capable of withstanding vibrations and changes in air temperature and pressure during the course of a flight. Early weapons often had a removable core for safety, installed by the air crew during flight. Also, they had to meet safety conditions were they dropped accidentally. And they had to have a fuze of a variety of types for detonation. US nuclear weapons that met these criteria are designated by the letter "B" followed, without a hyphen, by the sequential number of the "physics package" it contains. The B61, for example, was the main such bomb in the US arsenal for decades.

Various air-dropping techniques exist, including toss bombing, parachute-retarded delivery, and laydown modes, intended to give the dropping aircraft time to escape the ensuing blast.

The first weapons could only be carried by the B-29. Early weapons were so big and heavy that they could only be carried by bombers such as the B-52 and V bombers, but by the mid-1950s smaller weapons had been developed that could be carried and deployed by fighter-bombers.

[edit]
Ballistic missile warheads
Missiles using a ballistic trajectory usually deliver a warhead over the horizon. Mobile ballistic missiles may have a range of tens to hundreds of kilometers, while larger ICBMs or SLBMs may use suborbital or partial orbital trajectories for intercontinental range. Early ballistic missiles carried a single warhead, often of megaton-range yield. Since the 1970s modern ballistic weapons often use multiple independent reentry vehicles (MIRVs) with up to a dozen warheads, usually of kiloton-range yield. This allows a single launched missile to strike a handful of targets, or inflict maximum damage on a single target by encircling the target with warheads.

Missile warheads in the American arsenal are indicated by the letter "W"; e.g., W61 would have the same physics package as the B61 above, but it would have different environmental requirements, and, as it would not be crew-tended after launch but remain atop a missile for a great length of time, different safety requirements.

[edit]
Cruise missile warheads
A jet engine or rocket-propelled missile that flies at low altitude using an automated guidance system (usually inertial navigation, sometimes supplemented by either GPS or mid-course updates from friendly forces) to make them harder to detect or intercept could carry a nuclear warhead. Cruise missiles have shorter range and smaller payloads than ballistic missiles, so their warheads are smaller and less powerful. Rather than multiple warheads, which would have to be dropped separately as though the cruise missile were itself a bomber, each cruise missile carries its own warhead, although the B-1 Lancer bomber was designed to carry in its bomb-bay a rotating fixture for cruise missiles which resembles a set of MIRV warheads. Conventional cruise missiles sometimes use cluster munition payloads, though. Cruise missiles may be launched from mobile launchers on the ground, from naval ships, or from aircraft.

There is no letter change in the US arsenal to distinguish the warheads of cruise missiles from those for ballistic missiles.

[edit]
Other delivery systems
Other potential delivery methods include artillery shells, mines such as Blue Peacock, and nuclear depth charges and torpedoes for anti-submarine warfare. An atomic mortar was also tested. In the 1950s the U.S. developed small nuclear warheads for air defense use, such as the Nike Hercules. Further developments of this concept, some with much larger warheads, showed promise as anti-ballistic missiles. Most of the United States' nuclear air-defense weapons were out of service by the end of the 1960s, and nuclear depth bombs were taken out of service by 1990. However, the USSR (and later Russia) continues to maintain anti-ballistic missiles with nuclear warheads. Small, two-man portable tactical weapons ("erroneously referred to as suitcase bombs"), such as the Special Atomic Demolition Munition, have been developed, although the difficulty of balancing yield and portability limits their military utility.

See list of nuclear weapons for a list of the designs of nuclear weapons fielded by the various nuclear powers

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_weapons

platform389

04-08-2005, 06:04 AM

...and of course, there was Project Pluto.

Easily the most bizarre thing to come out of the Cold War. rofl

http://www.merkle.com/pluto/fig0.jpg

Powered by an unshielded nuclear ramjet engine at Mach 3! Carrying six H Bombs. Low level supersonic flight path.

http://www.merkle.com/pluto/fig3a.jpg

http://www.merkle.com/pluto/pluto.html

SLAM would carry a number of fusion bombs and attack multiple targets. The development team also believed the Mach 3 shockwave would do considerable damage along its low-altitude flight path, and the Pluto ramjet's exhaust would scatter fallout behind it. In fact, once the missile had expended its load of bombs, it could simply fly around an enemy country, leaving a trail of radioactive fallout, until it was shot down or crashed.

20-30 of these things flying over Russian territory would have finished the place off. Either let it fly and kill everything in it's path or shoot it down and have heavy radioactive contamination at the crash site(s).

http://instagiber.net/smiliesdotcom/contrib/aahmed/biggrin.gif

M4ko

04-08-2005, 09:16 PM

US attempt at creating mobile launcher.

http://www.aeronautics.ru/archive/wmd/ballistic/ballistic/midgetman_009.jpg

http://www.aeronautics.ru/archive/wmd/ballistic/ballistic/midgetman_016.jpg

http://www.aeronautics.ru/archive/wmd/ballistic/ballistic/midgetman_011.jpg

http://www.aeronautics.ru/archive/wmd/ballistic/ballistic/midgetman_015.jpg

I think this model was meant to be used for moon footage.

http://www.aeronautics.ru/archive/wmd/ballistic/ballistic/midgetman_004.jpg

http://www.aeronautics.ru/archive/wmd/ballistic/ballistic/midgetman_003.jpg

HoboWithAK

04-08-2005, 09:39 PM

http://img179.exs.cx/img179/4583/toma21xf.jpg

NOT a nuclear explosion.

M4ko

04-08-2005, 09:45 PM

http://img179.exs.cx/img179/4583/toma21xf.jpg

NOT a nuclear explosion.

what makes you say so?

platform389

04-08-2005, 10:28 PM

Rail Garrison Deployment of MX ICBM. Project cancelled during prototype testing. Launch car to Air Force Museum, first two pair of locomotives(...complete with armored cabs) transferred to US Army.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/systems/images/us_peacekeeper_07.jpg
http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/systems/images/us_peacekeeper_01.jpg
http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/systems/images/us_peacekeeper_06.jpg
Imagine this setting up and launching in Small Town, USA...
http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/systems/images/rgmx_02.jpg
http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/systems/images/pk-picc.jpg
http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/systems/images/rgmx_01.jpg
http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/systems/images/rgmx_05.gif

http://military.railfan.net/locos/USAUSAF/usa4647.JPG
http://military.railfan.net/locos/USAUSAF/usa4646.JPG

Once Minuteman III deloyment was underway, Strategic Air Command's planners began their search for a third-generation ICBM. SAC again sought the most technologically advanced system to secure increased range, variable warhead yields, and pinpoint accuracy. Several issues complicated the development and acquisition of a new ICBM system. The increased accuracy of Soviet missile systems spawned an intense debate over the survivability of fixed missile sites and the best method for basing the third-generation ICBM. However, the issue of funding, given an atmosphere of burgeoning federal deficits and cost-cutting measures, impeded SAC's efforts to acquire a new missile. Nonetheless, SAC persevered and brought the Missile-X into the ICBM inventory as the Peacekeeper missile.

The search for a system to replace the Minuteman began in 1971. Strategic Air Command, believing Minuteman technology to be obsolete, wanted a new missile that incorporated the most advanced technology available. Essential elements on SAC's list of requirements were increased range, greater accuracy, and variable yield warheads to capitalize on multiple independently-targetable reentry vehicle technology. Progress toward the new missile was made on 4 April 1972 when Headquarters Air Force assigned the designation "Missile-X" (M-X) to the advanced ICBM and made the Space and Missile Systems Organization (SAMSO) responsible for developing it.

The issue of hardened silos versus mobility surfaced almost immediately as a major M-X stumbling point. Improvements in Soviet ICBM forces and missile accuracy raised serious concerns over the ability of silo-based ICBMs to survive an attack. Proposed solutions to the problem were hardened silos and a mobile basing system. Strategic Air Command objected to mobile basing in 1973 because of its high expense, poor accuracy, and slow reaction time. Meanwhile, the defense community continued to explore both solutions. One approach to mobility was an air-mobile system, and during a 24 October 1974 test of the concept, SAMSO successfully launched a Minuteman I from a C-5A cargo aircraft. One month later, the Secretary of Defense, under intense political pressure to resolve basing issues and produce an economical missile system, pushed the M-X's initial operational capability from 1983 to 1985. At the same time, he initiated studies to determine the feasibility of developing a common M-X/Trident missile. In July 1976, Congress, convinced that silo-based missiles would be vulnerable to Soviet ICBMs, refused to appropriate funds for validation of a silo-based M-X system. Congress also deleted funds for air-mobile basing and directed validation of either a buried trench or shelter basing plan.

The defense establishment examined nearly forty basing modes before President Carter made his 12 June 1979 decision to proceed with full scale engineering development of the Missile-X. The President augmented this decision on 7 September 1979 with the selection of a horizontal multiple protective shelter basing plan for the new missile. Full scale engineering development began one week later.

Of all the MX ballistic missile deployment concepts, perhaps none was as elaborate as deep basing. In this concept, peacekeeper missiles were to be transported by rail through an extensive maze of rock tunnels. The tunnels were deep enough to protect the missiles and support facilities from the direct hit of large nuclear bombs. After attack, tunnels or shafts were bored to the surface and the missiles could then be launched. Special Projects studied concept variations for several years during the eighties. The studies included tunnel excavation, mucking, and support systems; underground nuclear, diesel generator, and fuel cell power plants; and ice, water, and steam heat sinks. During these studies, tunnel facilities were characterized and construction cost estimates and schedules were prepared.

In the eighties, the design commenced on the rail garrison facilities required to deploy the MX ballistic missile. In the original horizontal shelters concept, missiles were transported by trailer erector launchers (TEL) through a maze of roadways leading to hardened shelters. The concept used both decoys and real missiles to enhance survivability. Design of a base fire station had already started when this deployment concept was canceled by the new administration.

President Reagan, desiring more rapid deployment of the new missile, canceled the horizontal shelter plan on 2 October 1981 and advocated the deployment of a limited number of M-X missiles in superhardened Titan II or Minuteman silos. On 22 November 1982, the President further refined his position by announcing Closely Spaced Basing as the final solution to the M-X basing problem. President Reagan used the same speech to indicate his preference for "Peacekeeper" as the name of the M-X missile. Congress, which had rejected interim Peacekeeper basing in Minuteman silos in March 1982, also rejected Closely Spaced Basing and refused to approve Peacekeeper funding. The Congress further insisted that the President undertake a comprehensive technical assessment of the ICBM and basing alternatives.

President Reagan responded by first directing Headquarters Air Force to conduct a technical assessment. The Air Force report, completed in March 1983, advocated deployment of a new, highly accurate ICBM in sufficient numbers to eliminate the Soviet Union's "coercive advantage." The Air Force also recommended concurrent deployment of a survivable basing method that allowed credible, effective, and timely retaliation. A critical point in the Air Force assessment was the need to deploy an ICBM quickly as a demonstration of national resolve to preserve deterrence.

President Reagan also appointed a Commission on Strategic Forces chaired by Lieutenant General Brent Scowcroft. The Scowcroft Commission's report, issued on 6 April 1983, encouraged the development of a small single-warhead ICBM to meet the long-range threat, but recommended the immediate deployment of 100 Peacekeeper missiles in existing Minuteman silos to demonstrate national will and to compensate for the retirement of Titan II ICBMs. The Scowcroft report also encouraged a vigorous examination of all basing alternatives. President Reagan and Congress concurred with the Scowcroft Commission's findings and on 10 August 1983 the Secretary of Defense instructed the Air Force to deploy 100 Peacekeepers in Minuteman silos at F.E. Warren AFB, Wyoming. At the same time, the Defense Secretary directed the Air Force to initiate design of a small, single-warhead ICBM.

The Air Force successfully conducted the first test flight of the Peacekeeper June 17, 1983, from Vandenberg Air Force Base, Calif. The missile traveled 4,190 miles (6,704 kilometers) before dropping six unarmed test re-entry vehicles on planned target sites in the Kwajalein Missile Test Range in the Pacific Ocean.

The first two test phases consisted of 12 test flights to ensure the Peacekeeper's subsystems performed as planned, and to make final assessments of its range and payload capability. The missile was fired from above-ground canisters in its first eight tests. Thereafter, test flights were conducted from Minuteman test silos reconfigured to simulate operational Peacekeeper sites.

Peacekeeper production began in February 1984. Under plans prepared by Strategic Air Command, 50 Minuteman IIIs assigned to the 400th Strategic Missile Squadron, 90th Strategic Missile Wing, F.E. Warren AFB, Wyoming, were be removed and replaced with Peacekeeper missiles, which had an estimated service life of twenty years. Peacekeeper deployment was scheduled to begin in January 1986 and initial operational capability was set for December of the same year. The second increment of 50 missiles would replace Minuteman IIIs belonging to the 319th Strategic Missile Squadron at F.E. Warren. The expected completion date of the deployment was December 1989.

These plans were interrupted in July 1985 when Congress limited Peacekeeper deployment to 50 missiles until the administration could produce a more survivable basing plan. President Reagan's solution for basing the remaining 50 missiles, announced 19 December 1986, was Peacekeeper Rail Garrison. Three days later, the 90th SMW achieved initial operational capability for Peacekeeper by placing the first flight of ten missiles on strategic alert. Full operational capability occurred in December 1988, when the 90th Strategic Missile Wing accepted the fiftieth Peacekeeper missile.

By the late eighties, the deployment had changed to a rail car mounted launcher. The launchers were in train alert shelters for protection from a possible accidental explosion with three shelters per garrison. During an alert, the trains could roam over a large rail network becoming elusive targets. Final design for project was completed in 1990 when this concept was also canceled.

Under the rail garrison concept, the remaining Peacekeeper missiles would be placed on trains stationed at various U.S. Air Force installations. The 25 trains, each carrying two missiles, would deploy off-base and onto the national railroad network during periods of international tension to improve survivability. F.E. Warren AFB would serve as the Main Operating Base for the rail garrison force. In February 1987, the Air Force selected ten additional bases as candidate rail garrison locations. That same year, Congress appropriated $350 million to fund rail garrison research and development. Exercises conducted in 1988 tested and refined the concept of operations, and in May the Secretary of Defense authorized the Air Force to proceed with Peacekeeper Rail Garrison full scale development.

A further review of ICBM moderization produced a Presidential decision in April 1989 that limited the Peacekeeper system to the existing 50 missiles but directed they be redeployed from silos to rail garrison. In November, the Air Force announced the selection of seven bases to house Peacekeeper Rail Garrison. The Main Operating Base would be F.E. Warren AFB, Wyoming, and the other six bases were Barksdale AFB, Louisiana; Little Rock AFB, Arkansas; Grand Forks AFB, North Dakota; Dyess AFB, Texas; Wurtsmith AFB, Michigan; and Fairchild AFB, Washington. December 1992 was the date established for delivery of the first asset.

The Air Force achieved initial operational capability of 10 deployed Peacekeepers at F.E. Warren AFB, Wyo., in December 1986. Full operational capability was achieved in December 1988 with the establishment of a squadron of 50 missiles.

Ballistic Missile Organization, Air Force Materiel Command (now Detachment 10, Space and Missile Systems Center), began full-scale development of the Peacekeeper in 1979. This organization, located at San Bernadino, Calif., integrated the activities of more than 27 civilian contractors and numerous subcontractors to develop and build the Peacekeeper system.

n'hum3

04-08-2005, 11:51 PM

http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/usa/bomber/b-36-1949.jpg

This plane had alot of engine problems. I saw something on it on TV and there is alot of controversy surrounding one of those planes from the US that crashed in Canada during cold war. The mission orders were clear not to enter in canadian airspace. They also said it containned a mark4 nuclear weapon that was ready to be used. Soon after the crash US sent a military commando that destroyed the crashed plane. Canadian researchers whent to the crash site to investigate the plane's remaining parts. They found a birdcage used to carry the plutonium core. There is so mutch controversy surrounding this event. Why would the US immidiatly destroy the crashed plane in a non hostile country? What happened the the guy in charge of the bomb? Where is the bomb? If it was an exercise why is there a birdcage to carry the plutinium core in the crashsite? Is this a brokenarrow?
Any one has more infos on this? Im kinda messed up... :|

M4ko

04-09-2005, 12:42 AM

http://www.aeronautics.ru/archive/wmd/ballistic/ballistic/wpe12.jpg

http://www.aeronautics.ru/archive/wmd/ballistic/ballistic/ss18_002.jpg

www.aeronautics.ru

M4ko

04-09-2005, 12:48 AM

Does the circled part look like an atenna?

http://img210.exs.cx/img210/5162/wpe12544lk.jpg

M4ko

04-09-2005, 02:46 AM

GazB

04-09-2005, 04:27 AM

Nice Pics everyone.

what makes you say so?

I have seen that series of photos too... it is a photo of a Tomahawk cruise missile with a conventional warhead detonating over an aircraft in a berm. A berm is like a car park for one with dirt piled up on three sides and is used for aircraft and tanks to protect them from fragments from nearby explosions... in other words it stops all your aircraft lined up near your runway from being destroyed or damaged beyond repair by one well placed frag bomb.

GazB

04-09-2005, 05:07 AM

Currently in testing is another improved modification of Topol-M called Bulava.

The Bulava is a SLBM variant of the Topol-M.

roland

04-09-2005, 12:42 PM

French AMX30 Pluton:
http://www.chars-francais.net/images/archives/amx30_pluton/pluton_001.jpg

VooDooII3dfx

04-09-2005, 06:30 PM

http://img179.exs.cx/img179/4583/toma21xf.jpg

NOT a nuclear explosion.

what makes you say so?

I've seen the pic before.. its a tomahawk.

Even the first part of the file name is "toma".

M4ko

04-10-2005, 05:52 PM

More on suitcase bombs.

http://www.nationalterroralert.com/images/nuclear_suitcase_bomb_nuke.gif

http://www.cnn.com/TECH/9701/16/t_t/nuclear/suitcase.jpg

http://www.financialsense.com/stormwatch/images/2003/10S1/suitcase.gif

http://www.unitedstatesaction.com/nuclear.jpg

http://www.terroristalerts.org/images/sadm.jpg

http://www.stevequayle.com/News.alert/03_Nukes/03_Nuke_pics/0005suitcase-1.lg.jpg

Groove

06-15-2005, 05:46 PM

http://submarine.id.ru/galery/t239.jpg

You can see the propeller on this pic. This are the most secret parts outside of a sub. Just wondering they show it.

Abolith

06-15-2005, 06:28 PM

http://media.militaryphotos.net/photos/albums/abolith/aaa.jpg

ZeroZen

06-15-2005, 07:00 PM

Does the circled part look like an atenna?

http://img210.exs.cx/img210/5162/wpe12544lk.jpg

China got that train style ICBM launcher too, I read a papers from HK mag that they build 25 of them for dong feng or East Wind missles since 1993. Just after the US cancelled its program. I dont know the current number but its more survivable than the PRC's advertized Vehicle Launch ICBM.

M4ko

06-15-2005, 08:28 PM

NicNZ

06-15-2005, 09:11 PM

http://nuclearweaponarchive.org/Usa/Weapons/W80handle.jpg

After the war, Adolf worked for many years developing missiles... :D

M4ko

06-15-2005, 09:16 PM

http://nuclearweaponarchive.org/Usa/Weapons/W80handle.jpg

After the war, Adolf worked for many years developing missiles... :D

hahaha, he looks well-fed.

DPGLAW

06-15-2005, 09:55 PM

WoW....that is interesting, I thought all nuclear missles, ICBMS, were silo launched...I didnt know they had mobile launchers, learned something new :)

Doom

06-15-2005, 09:58 PM

http://img147.exs.cx/img147/5539/abm1bh.jpg
WOW, what is that?

mlrs84

06-15-2005, 10:12 PM

http://img147.exs.cx/img147/5539/abm1bh.jpg
WOW, what is that?
Looks to me like an atomic explosion just milliseconds after detonation when the blast has not yet reached the ground.

mlrs84

06-15-2005, 10:17 PM

If you would like post anything here, preferbly images, related to nuclear warfare.

Russian Nuclear Forces

For now im posting images of Topol-M (SS-27). SS-27 Mobile complexes have just been started to be deployed. These are 5th generation missiles. Currently in testing is another improved modification of Topol-M called Bulava. Also another missile has been reported recently to be in developemnt which will not be stopped by any anti missle defence.

http://img60.exs.cx/img60/5992/ss250011to.jpg

http://img217.exs.cx/img217/5483/ss250026sl.jpg

http://img217.exs.cx/img217/3369/topolm20ks.png

http://img236.exs.cx/img236/4610/tyjuyt2xk.png

The upper three pics are actually SS-25 Topol not SS-27 Topol-M.
They look similar, but the SS-27 is mounted on a 8 axle Transporter Erector Launcher (TEL) named MZKT-79221, while the SS-25 is mounted on an older 7 axle TEL.

The lowest pic as far as I know is not an ICBM, but a modified TEL for space vehicle launches.

This neat russian page shows some pics of the weapon system, and the 8-axle TEL without the weapon system:http://legion.wplus.net/guide/army/tr/mzkt7922.shtml
And here's the same site's Topol-m page:http://legion.wplus.net/guide/army/rk/rs12m1.shtml

SS-27 RT-2UTTH Topol-M "Sickle" Missile:
http://www.al-moughtarib.com/Foto%20Galery/waffen%20malaf/topol-Nr-3.jpg

Abolith

06-15-2005, 11:00 PM

http://img147.exs.cx/img147/5539/abm1bh.jpg
WOW, what is that?

that good sir is 1/2ms after detonation. the spikes are called "rope tricks". The nuke it self was a tower shot, operation Tumbler-Snapper
April 15, 1952 - Nevada Proving Ground.

the "rope trick" test was one of the four tower shots at the NTS areas:
EASY, 12Kt - 300 ft tower NTS area 1
FOX, 11Kt - 300 ft tower NTS area 4
GEORGE, 15Kt - 300 ft tower NTS area 3
HOW, 14Kt - 300 ft tower NTS area 2
I have yet to figure out of the four it was, and from my research neither has anyone else :(

The photograph was done by the Rapatronic camera built by the EG&G company.

Link to my album:
http://media.militaryphotos.net/photos/abolith?page=1

Resevoir Hogs

06-16-2005, 04:22 AM

Now I am become Death, the destroyer of worlds

Milkman

06-16-2005, 04:55 AM

I love those pics of the nukes after just milliseconds of detonation. Some of them you can still see the tower in them.

http://www.multied.com/aviation/HISTORY4/b58.jpg
B-58 "Hustler" Supersonic Nuclear delivery
Dimensions:
Wing span: 56 ft. 10 in (17.32 m)
Length: 96 ft. 9 in (29.49 m)
Height: 31 ft. 5 in (9.58 m)
Wing Area: 1,542 sq ft (470 sq m)
Weights:
Empty: 55,560 lb (25,201 kg)
Max T/O: 163,000 lb (73,935 kg)
Performance:
Maximum Speed: 1,321 mph (2,125 km/h) @ 63,150 ft (19,248 m)
Combat Ceiling: 63,150 ft (19,248 m)
Record Ceiling: 85,360 ft (26,017 m)
Combat Radius: 1,750 miles (2,816 km) to,
5,577 miles (8,975 km) with inflight refueling

Amazing that they created such a masterpiece in the early 50's.

http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/usa/bomber/b-58-bw1.jpg

Turhapuro

06-16-2005, 05:19 AM

This is not photo, but I think everyone is interested:

Going Seriously Boom!
Life Aboard a Nuclear Missile Submarine

http://www.fredoneverything.net/Boomer.html

Calimero

06-16-2005, 09:25 AM

mlrs84

06-23-2005, 07:48 PM

Ezra Coli

06-23-2005, 11:57 PM

Great thread, I love this topic.

There is one pic that used to scare me when I was growing up, this one right here:
http://img179.exs.cx/img179/9811/atombombexplosion4zh.jpg
Living in US target number 5 on the assumed list of Soviet priorities, I fully expected to wake up to that image out my window just long enough to see it before being vaporized or pummeled to gel be the overpressure. That was a seriously scary time, most kids my age expected it sooner or later. Kind of gloomy to think about now.

and this one, I've seen these guys once in Colorado or some midwest state while driving through in the late 1980s. short train compared with the others, looked like it was hauling plain old cargo, but I just remember a red engine with "US ARMY" on it thinking it was cool.

http://military.railfan.net/locos/USAUSAF/usa4647.JPG

rister

06-24-2005, 05:03 AM

Who ****ing cares what the others have; build your own Atomic Bomb:
The project will cost between $5,000 and $30,000, depending on how fancy you want the final product to be. Since last week's column, "Let's Make a Time Machine", was received so well in the new step-by-step format, this month's column will follow the same format.

CONSTRUCTION METHOD
First, obtain about 50 pounds (110 kg) of weapons grade Plutonium at your local supplier (see NOTE 1). A nuclear power plant is not recommended, as large quantities of missing Plutonium tends to make plant engineers unhappy. We suggest that you contact your local terrorist organization, or perhaps the Junior Achievement in your neighborhood.
Please remember that Plutonium, especially pure, refined Plutonium, is somewhat dangerous. Wash your hands with soap and warm water after handling the material, and don't allow your children or pets to play in it or eat it. Any left over Plutonium dust is excellent as an insect repellant. You may wish to keep the substance in a lead box if you can find one in your local junk yard, but an old coffee can will do nicely.
Fashion together a metal enclosure to house the device. Most common varieties of sheet metal can be bent to disguise this enclosure as, for example, a briefcase, a lunch pail, or a Buick. Do not use tinfoil.
Arrange the Plutonium into two hemispheral shapes, separated by about 4 cm. Use rubber cement to hold the Plutonium dust together.
Now get about 100 pounds (220 kg) of trinitrotoluene (TNT). Gelignite is much better, but messier to work with. Your helpful hardware man will be happy to provide you with this item.
Pack the TNT around the hemisphere arrangement constructed in step 4. If you cannot find Gelignite, fell free to use TNT packed in with Playdo or any modeling clay. Colored clay is acceptable, but there is no need to get fancy at this point.
Enclose the structure from step 6 into the enclosure made in step 3. Use a strong glue such as "Crazy Glue" to bind the hemisphere arrangement against the enclosure to prevent accidental detonation which might result from vibration or mishandling.
To detonate the device, obtain a radio controlled (RC) servo mechanism, as found in RC model airplanes and cars. With a modicum of effort, a remote plunger can be made that will strike a detonator cap to effect a small explosion. These detonatior caps can be found in the electrical supply section of your local supermarket. We recommend the "Blast-O-Mactic" brand because they are no deposit-no return.
Now hide the completed device from the neighbors and children. The garage is not recommended because of high humidity and the extreme range of temperatures experienced there. Nuclear devices have been known to spontaneously detonate in these unstable conditions. The hall closet or under the kitchen sink will be perfectly suitable.
Now you are the proud owner of a working thermonuclear device! It is a great ice-breaker at parties, and in a pinch, can be used for national defense.
THEORY OF OPERATION
The device basically works when the detonated TNT compresses the Plutonium into a critical mass. The critical mass then produces a nuclear chain recation similar to the domino chain reaction (discussed in this column, "Dominos on the March", March, 1968). The chain reaction then promptly produces a big thermonuclear reaction. And there you have it, a 10 megaton explosion!

:roll: :roll:

morlick

06-24-2005, 05:20 AM

French AMX30 Pluton:
http://www.chars-francais.net/images/archives/amx30_pluton/pluton_001.jpg

woot

it was my regiment

chassem

06-24-2005, 11:42 AM

Anyone interested in pretty (as in in-f*#king-credible) footage of nuclear testing check out the documentary "Trinity and beyond". It documents all of the nuclear testing done by the US, USSR and and to a lesser extent China in the 40s, 50s and 60s.

The footage was declassified about 10 years ago and is simply unbelievable!

Landser_1942

06-24-2005, 12:02 PM

Some more AMX30 PLUTON here : http://tanxheaven.com/amx30plu/amx30plupic.htm

have a nice day ;)

Fee Fi Fo Fum

06-24-2005, 12:13 PM

The SSBN

The Vanguard Class SSBN (Ship Submersible Ballistic Nuclear) provides the United Kingdom's strategic and sub-strategic nuclear deterrent. The first Vanguard class submarine was launched in 1993 carrying Trident II D5 missiles and is now the cornerstone of our Defence policy and significantly contributes to the Alliance's deterrent forces.

http://www.royal-navy.mod.uk/static/pages/data/gallery/full/988818571f.jpg
http://www.royal-navy.mod.uk/static/pages/data/gallery/full/988906471f.jpg
http://www.royal-navy.mod.uk/static/pages/data/gallery/full/1025086034f.jpg

Calimero

06-25-2005, 06:02 PM

Some ex- Dutch nucliair weapons:

http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/land/m107-slant.jpg
The M110

http://img.yezzz.com/fi2369975.jpeg
the Lance

http://www.army.mil/cmh-pg/books/Lineage/M-F/images/c10f6.jpg
http://nuclearweaponarchive.org/Usa/Weapons/W31hjohn.jpg
the Honest JohnHmm, didn't know that you guys have had nukes :P

Well, we didn't, but we where able to fire US nukes.

http://www.vriendenlegermuseum.nl/museum/images/honestjohn.jpg

http://www.vriendenlegermuseum.nl/museum/images/m110a2.jpg

Sand Man

10-29-2006, 06:53 AM

SRPSKI METAK

10-29-2006, 07:09 AM

I was going to say same thing in reply to this guy :)

Damn it I was going to say that too.It's f***ing truerofl rofl rofl rofl rofl rofl

hoerselberg

11-04-2008, 03:21 PM

Does the circled part look like an atenna?

http://img210.exs.cx/img210/5162/wpe12544lk.jpg

Keine Antenne. Mit dieser Apparatur am Anfang und am Ende der Startrampe werden die Fahrdrähte bei elektrischem Betrieb der Strecke zur Seite gehoben. Sie stören sonst bei der Aufrichtung der Rakete in Startposition.

Factanonverba

11-04-2008, 03:47 PM

The Douglas (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Douglas) Genie (MB-1 Ding-Dong, AIR-2) was an unguided air-to-air rocket (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air-to-air_rocket) with a 1.5kt W25 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/W25_%28nuclear_warhead%29) nuclear warhead (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_warhead). It was deployed by the United States Air Force (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Air_Force) (from the late 1950s) and the Canadian Forces Air Command (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadian_Forces_Air_Command) (from 1 February 1968 to the 1980s) during the Cold War (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cold_War). Production ended in 1962 after over 3000 were produced, with some related training and test derivatives occurring later.
http://img142.imageshack.us/img142/3067/250pxplumbbobjohnnucleapp3.jpg

http://img142.imageshack.us/img142/9885/convairf106adeltadart1nw7.jpg

http://img135.imageshack.us/img135/250/air2agenie2zj8.jpg

Euroamerican

11-04-2008, 03:49 PM

I've always seen this pic from time to time and I was just wondering what happened to all those ships around the blast?

Did they all sink after all that water and debris came down?

http://img179.exs.cx/img179/8467/crossbaker84dl.jpg

NO. Most did not sink or did not sink for a long time. Some were scuttled later, some were repaired and used again for more testing.

orionhawk

11-04-2008, 03:52 PM

NO. Most did not sink or did not sink for a long time. Some were scuttled later, some were repaired and used again for more testing.
someone beat me to it.

they were effectively destroyed even so. if it had been real, the crews would have died and the ships would have been incapable of combat.

Factanonverba

11-04-2008, 03:54 PM

Keine Antenne. Mit dieser Apparatur am Anfang und am Ende der Startrampe werden die Fahrdrähte bei elektrischem Betrieb der Strecke zur Seite gehoben. Sie stören sonst bei der Aufrichtung der Rakete in Startposition.

Das ist ein Englisch Forum..It's a english forum

hoerselberg

11-04-2008, 04:26 PM

Das ist ein Englisch Forum..It's a english forum

Ich habe nichts dagegen:)

Scheinbar bist du der einzigste User, den die deutsche Antwort gestört hat. Ich habe hier nur einen Fakt mitgeteilt, brauche keine Konversation.

Nice job :bash: , you teacher???

Gruß Edgar

fusilero

11-04-2008, 05:01 PM

R-36 (MISSILE) NATO SS18 SATAN

http://lh3.ggpht.com/_erq5Z9l-0CA/R1B3jUNtt5I/AAAAAAAAJMw/d0588yHmX-I/SS-18+Missile_1.jpg
http://www.fas.org/nuke/control/start1/text/image/rfphotos/rs20ss18empl.jpg

http://www.fas.org/nuke/control/start1/text/image/rfphotos/rs20ss18c.jpg

Sousuke

11-04-2008, 05:05 PM

http://img142.imageshack.us/img142/3067/250pxplumbbobjohnnucleapp3.jpg

Looks like a skull...creepy.

Shadowstorm

11-04-2008, 05:08 PM

Ich habe nichts dagegen:)

Scheinbar bist du der einzigste User, den die deutsche Antwort gestört hat. Ich habe hier nur einen Fakt mitgeteilt, brauche keine Konversation.

Nice job :bash: , you teacher???

Gruß Edgar
No, he's telling you to use English to avoid getting your infraction.

fusilero

11-04-2008, 05:26 PM

OSCAR II (ANTYEY) (TYPE 949A) (SSGN)

Displacement, tons: 13,900 surfaced; 18,300 dived
Dimensions, feet (metres): 505.2 × 59.7 × 29.5 (154 × 18.2 × 9)
Main machinery: Nuclear; 2 VM-5 PWR; 380 MW; 2 GT3A turbines; 98,000 hp(m) (72 MW); 2 shafts; 2 spinners
Speed, knots: 28 dived; 15 surfaced
Complement: 107 (48 officers)
Missiles: SSM: 24 Chelomey SS-N-19 Shipwreck (Granit) (improved SS-N-12 with lower flight profile); inertial with command update guidance; active radar homing to 20-550 km (10.8-300 n miles) at 1.6 Mach; warhead 750 kg HE or 500 kT nuclear. Novator Alfa SS-N-27 may be carried in due course.
A/S: Novator SS-N-15 Starfish (Tsakra) fired from 53 cm tubes; inertial flight to 45 km (24.3 n miles); warhead nuclear 200 kT or Type 40 torpedo.
Novator SS-N-16 Stallion fired from 65 cm tubes; inertial flight to 100 km (54 n miles); payload nuclear 200 kT (Vodopad) or Type 40 torpedo (Veder).
Torpedoes: 4-21 in (533 mm) and 2-26 in (650 mm) tubes. Combination of 65 and 53 cm torpedoes (see table at front of section). Total of 28 weapons including tube-launched A/S missiles.
Mines: 32 can be carried.
Countermeasures: ESM: Rim Hat; intercept.
Weapons control: Punch Bowl for third party targeting.
Radars: Surface search: Snoop Pair or Snoop Half; I-band.
Sonars: Shark Gill; hull-mounted; passive/active search and attack; low/medium frequency.
Shark Rib flank array; passive; low frequency.
Mouse Roar; hull-mounted; active attack; high frequency.
Pelamida towed array; passive search; very low frequency.

Programmes: There is some doubt whether K 530 will be completed. Name/Number attribution is still uncertain, and Omsk may have been renamed Petropavlosk Kamchatsky.
Structure: SSM missile tubes are in banks of 12 either side and external to the 8.5 m diameter pressure hull; they are inclined at 40º with one hatch covering each pair, the whole resulting in the very large beam. The position of the missile tubes provides a large gap of some 4 m between the outer and inner hulls. Diving depth, 1,000 ft (300 m) although 2,000 ft (600 m) is claimed.
Operational: ELF/VLF communications buoy. All have a tube on the rudder fin as in Delta IV which is used for dispensing a thin line towed sonar array. Pert Spring SATCOM. K 173, K 410, K 266 and K 141 are based at Litsa South in the Northern Fleet and the remainder at Tarya Bay in the Pacific. In 1999 one Northern Fleet unit deployed for the first Russian SSGN patrol in the Mediterranean for ten years. At the same time a Pacific Fleet unit sailed to the western seaboard of the United States. The first three of the class K 148, K 132 and K 119 are laid up awaiting disposal . The only two Oscar Is are laid up in the Northern Fleet

http://img.blog.yahoo.co.kr/ybi/1/24/56/shinecommerce/folder/55/img_55_13862_4?1186373606.jpg
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/39/Submarine_Oscar_class.jpg

fusilero

11-04-2008, 07:05 PM

Trident II D-5 Fleet Ballistic Missile

http://www.lockheedmartin.com/data/assets/ssc/trident_II.jpg
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/02/Trident_missile_launch.jpg

Factanonverba

11-05-2008, 12:37 AM

Ich habe nichts dagegen:)

Scheinbar bist du der einzigste User, den die deutsche Antwort gestört hat. Ich habe hier nur einen Fakt mitgeteilt, brauche keine Konversation.

Nice job :bash: , you teacher???

Gruß Edgar

I'm not distubred about you talk in german, its the laws of the forum i written only one word in french only one and some one give me a avertisment a "yellow card" its just for you...

eskachig

11-05-2008, 02:26 AM

To me all of them look like prototypes, I dont think that even Russia has a functioning model.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RT-23_Molodets

Deployed and fielded in the late eighties, gradually withdrawn since then.

hoerselberg

11-05-2008, 09:54 AM

I'm not distubred about you talk in german, its the laws of the forum i written only one word in french only one and some one give me a avertisment a "yellow card" its just for you...

...you give me a "yellow card".... ? For an answer in german? rofl

Jµµso

01-04-2011, 08:38 PM

Few documentaries I found.

Chinese nuclear weapons.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pq6yMDBOcuI

Atomic Weapons Tests Trinity through Buster Jangle

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MWIJVM9kdek

orionhawk

04-13-2011, 04:22 PM

...you give me a "yellow card".... ? For an answer in german? rofl

No, he's warning you to stick to English so you don't have to GET a "yellow card".

From the Rules, page 1, post 1: "10. This site's language is English. Using alternate languages to get around the flaming or insulting rules is not allowed and can earn a ban."

I strongly suggest you read the rules before making any further posts.
http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/showthread.php?1554-Forum-Rules

SturmPionier

04-15-2011, 04:20 PM

153308

I just wondered about the "steam" under the sub, where doest it come from ?

Is it coolingwater from the reactor ?

Ivan le Fou

04-15-2011, 04:22 PM

Looks like it is actually coming out from the sides of the barge.

orionhawk

05-02-2011, 11:47 PM

I just wondered about the "steam" under the sub, where doest it come from ?

Is it coolingwater from the reactor ?

I would educated-wild-guess that that is steam or spray from steam-cleaning or pressure washing the hull from a barge below it. it is most assuredly not cooling water, steam, or any other such thing from the sub's reactor, which has to be shut down and fully cooled down before the sub can be drydocked.

G-AWZT

05-03-2011, 12:26 AM