Get your fill of sci-fi, science, and mockery of stupid ideas
https://bbs.stardestroyer.net/
Doesn't necessarily mean the VOY is in atmosphere. It can start at an altitude of 800,000km and be flying towards them.MKSheppard wrote:Err, they can hit AIRCRAFT, and the Intrepid can fly in atmosphere, remember?Darth Wong wrote:the fact remains the USN can't hit spacecraft.
he said:
"Anyway, the entire US Navy assembles in the Pacific somewhere, Voyager flies towards them and attacks. "
Virtually all military hardware is hardened against EMP. Why do you thinkDurandal wrote:Even if Voyager was in the atmosphere, and the Ohio tried air-bursting a nuke, they'd knock out all their electronics with the resulting EM pulse. Not a very smart maneuver.
Problem is the later USN ships are actually physically nuke-hardened,And by the way, all Voyager would have to do is heat the water with their phasers and send a few torpedoes in there as well. They don't even have to directly hit the ships, just the general area around them.
True (depending on how close the detonation is and how effective the electronics hardening is), but if they're getting their asses kicked and it's technically possible (or they had been prepared for this eventuality), they'd probably do it anyway because it would be worth it. The energy distribution of a nuclear airburst is much different than a nuclear detonation in space, and the shockwave would probably slam the Voyager hard enough to kill its shielding, heavily damage the vessel, and knock it out of the air.Durandal wrote:Even if Voyager was in the atmosphere, and the Ohio tried air-bursting a nuke, they'd knock out all their electronics with the resulting EM pulse. Not a very smart maneuver.
It's hardened against traditional EMP, not the massive pulse a nuclear blast in very close proximity (which is where it'd have to be if they had any hope of scoring a hit) would release.MKSheppard wrote:Virtually all military hardware is hardened against EMP. Why do you think it costs so damn much?
I wasn't referring to radioactive water. Water serves as an insulator for radiation. I was referring to the fact that Voyager could boil the ships' crews to death. They could also throw up massive waves by detonating a photon torpedo in the water and capsize the ships.Problem is the later USN ships are actually physically nuke-hardened, and were designed to be fought in a nuclear exchange with radioactive water raining down on them
That's probably true. We've seen Federation vessels get knocked around by far, far less. Realistically though, they'd almost have to detonate it in close proximity to have any chance of scoring a hit.Darth Wong wrote:True (depending on how close the detonation is and how effective the electronics hardening is), but if they're getting their asses kicked and it's technically possible (or they had been prepared for this eventuality), they'd probably do it anyway because it would be worth it. The energy distribution of a nuclear airburst is much different than a nuclear detonation in space, and the shockwave would probably slam the Voyager hard enough to kill its shielding, heavily damage the vessel, and knock it out of the air.
How do you determine "close" proximity? The Soviets loved to useDurandal wrote: It's hardened against traditional EMP, not the massive pulse a nuclear blast in very close proximity (which is where it'd have to be if they had any hope of scoring a hit) would release.
The Force is NOT with this one, masterAlso, if this is the entire US navy, won't there be aircraft carriers? Well wait, nevermind. Navy planes, to my knowledge, can't be outfitted with nuclear ordnance, or can they?
That's not the same thing as an actual nuclear warhead, genius. Do you honestly think that the resulting EM effects from a nuclear-tipped missile will be the same as a kiloton-level nuclear detonation?MKSheppard wrote:How do you determine "close" proximity? The Soviets loved to use Nuke-tipped anti ship missiels that would detonate inside US CVBGs to get rid of them during the cold War, so we had to deal with close proximity detonations when designing our warships.
Oh fuck off. It was an honest question. Even so, I just realized that the F/A-18 can be equipped with nuclear bombs, but what about missiles?The Force is NOT with this one, master
WTF are you defining as "traditional" EMP? A low altitude nuclear explosion produces very little in the way EMP, anything that would be significantly affected would also be smashed by the overpressure, and warships are protected against high altitude bursts which the Soviest where expected to use in action. Course a high altitude explosion isn't in "very close" proximity.Durandal wrote:
It's hardened against traditional EMP, not the massive pulse a nuclear blast in very close proximity (which is where it'd have to be if they had any hope of scoring a hit) would release.
Major waves require energy releases far beyond what a photo torpedo will give you.I wasn't referring to radioactive water. Water serves as an insulator for radiation. I was referring to the fact that Voyager could boil the ships' crews to death. They could also throw up massive waves by detonating a photon torpedo in the water and capsize the ships.
Basically everything combat the USN has flown since the 1950's can carry nuclear weapons. There where also nuclear 16 inch shells and a vast array of nuclear warhead armed SAM's, along with nuclear torpedos.Also, if this is the entire US navy, won't there be aircraft carriers? Well wait, nevermind. Navy planes, to my knowledge, can't be outfitted with nuclear ordnance, or can they?
Damien, a nuclear tipped missile carries a 1kt or higher warhead, whichDurandal wrote:[
That's not the same thing as an actual nuclear warhead, genius. Do you honestly think that the resulting EM effects from a nuclear-tipped missile will be the same as a kiloton-level nuclear detonation?
Do you know nothing? Wel lclearly that is the case. Refering to a weapon as being "nuclear tipped" means it has a nuclear warhead, you know the things that explode with kiloton, or often in the case of Soviet anti shipping weapons multi megaton nuclear explosions. What the fuck else did you think it would be if not an nuclear warhead anyway?Durandal wrote:
That's not the same thing as an actual nuclear warhead, genius. Do you honestly think that the resulting EM effects from a nuclear-tipped missile will be the same as a kiloton-level nuclear detonation?
The Hornet only used gravity bombs.Oh fuck off. It was an honest question. Even so, I just realized that the F/A-18 can be equipped with nuclear bombs, but what about missiles?
TurboPhaser wrote:Hmm, 38 replies in 3 hours- not too shabby.
I apologise for not being more specific in my scenario description, it seems to have created some friction. I'll update my original post with this:
The Intrepid class ship IS in the atmosphere, for this to be a battle, both parties have to actually hit each other. The Intrepid class begins attacking at 3 KM. The US Navy fleet is as it is in 2003.
Yes, ALL Navy vessels. Including Aircraft carriers and their aircraft.
I've done a bit of digging and found some rather puzzling info on Voyager's shield capabilities.
Episode 'Blink of an eye': Voyager's shields begin to buckle under KT (possibly less) Anti-matter explosions launched from a planet they were orbiting.
Episode 'Night': Voyager's sheilds have trouble with more KT like explosions. (The Malon Garbage ship's Spacial Charges)
Episode 'Think Tank' : Voyager's sheilds hold against a planet exploding directly in their face. Where as in 'Scorpion', 2 Borg Cubes were destroyed by a planet exploding. You'd think the Borg would have superior shields.
Rather contradictory info, is it not?
Just how did you determine that these explosion are KT level?TurboPhaser wrote:Hmm, 38 replies in 3 hours- not too shabby.
I apologise for not being more specific in my scenario description, it seems to have created some friction. I'll update my original post with this:
The Intrepid class ship IS in the atmosphere, for this to be a battle, both parties have to actually hit each other. The Intrepid class begins attacking at 3 KM. The US Navy fleet is as it is in 2003.
Yes, ALL Navy vessels. Including Aircraft carriers and their aircraft.
I've done a bit of digging and found some rather puzzling info on Voyager's shield capabilities.
Episode 'Blink of an eye': Voyager's shields begin to buckle under KT (possibly less) Anti-matter explosions launched from a planet they were orbiting.
Episode 'Night': Voyager's sheilds have trouble with more KT like explosions. (The Malon Garbage ship's Spacial Charges)
Episode 'Think Tank' : Voyager's sheilds hold against a planet exploding directly in their face. Where as in 'Scorpion', 2 Borg Cubes were destroyed by a planet exploding. You'd think the Borg would have superior shields.
Rather contradictory info, is it not?
A nuke test in the 1950s would more likely than not be bigger than anything the USN could throw at an Intrepid.Chris OFarrell wrote:On topic, it should be noted in 'Little Green men' that Quark Nog and Rom flew a Ferangi shuttlepod (read a pissweak little transport) into the heart of a nuclear detonation in the 1950's to cause some technobabble reaction to send them forward in time. But they didn't even worry in the slightest about the explosion itself or its shockwave, they blast right through both. Now I'll grant a nuke detonation in the late 1950's isn't the same thing as a nuke today. But its still a good indicator that a little shuttle didn't even worry about any damage.
What have you been smoking? If you detonate megaton-ranged nuclear devices in low orbit, you will ionize a huge portion of the upper atmosphere and cause a monster EMP. That's one of the reasons that space-based nukes are frowned upon, in case you didn't know. And these people were detonating these things in low orbit above major population centres.Chris OFarrell wrote:In 'Blink of an Eye' what the heck said that the antimatter based weapons were KT ranged? The antimatter warheads were not even bothering Voyager all that much given the number of hits she took. The Tricobolot weapons were what actually hurt her.
Wasn't the Malon ship unshielded and falling apart? How powerful could these charges have been if they were detonated anywhere near it?The Malon ships spacial charges never had a yield attributed to them.
So you figure the Borg wouldn't raise their shields when a flotilla of S-8472 ships appear after six months of continuous warfare?The Borg Cubes I don't know if they even had their shields up at the time of the planetary explosion. Their standard MO appeared to be shields down until they've experience a specific threat, then adapt defences.
What exactly happened?Think tank is just....weird.
Ah, leave it to you to misrepresent a Star Trek episode in hopes that no one will notice. From the screenplay:On topic, it should be noted in 'Little Green men' that Quark Nog and Rom flew a Ferangi shuttlepod (read a pissweak little transport) into the heart of a nuclear detonation in the 1950's to cause some technobabble reaction to send them forward in time. But they didn't even worry in the slightest about the explosion itself or its shockwave, they blast right through both. Now I'll grant a nuke detonation in the late 1950's isn't the same thing as a nuke today. But its still a good indicator that a little shuttle didn't even worry about any damage.
Nope, they did not fly into the "heart of a nuclear detonation". They flew into the mushroom cloud created after a nuclear detonation, because they just wanted beta radiation from the mushroom cloud to interact with their Kemacite cargo (note that this also means their ship was not shielded against low-penetration particle radiation, and that they must have been in dire need of Trek's magical radiation curative therapy when they got back to DS9).ROM: We fly straight into the atomic explosion, expose the kemacite to the beta radiation and engage the warp engines. If we have enough kemacite, we should be able to create a reverse time warp and ride it home.
...
72 EXT. NEVADA DESERT (OPTICAL) - NIGHT: Close on the mushrooming cloud of a nuclear explosion. Hold on it for a second, and then the Ferengi shuttle zooms into screen and plunges into the cloud.
73 INT. FERENGI SHUTTLE (OPTICAL): The Ferengi shuttle is undergoing some serious shaking and stirring.
QUARK: I don't like this.
ODO (concerned): Rom, tell your brother it's going to be all right.
ROM: It's going to be all right, Brother. (qualifying) I hope.
Suddenly, the screen WHITES OUT.
74 EXT. SPACE (OPTICAL): The Earth as seen from space. Suddenly the Ferengi shuttle winks into existence and drifts across the screen, with no engine power.
And about using Ohio class SLBM's to fire Tridents at Voyager.... Assuming the crew could even reprogram them to do what is required (they couldn't), the missile has no terminal guidance, the sub has no aquisistion gear to track the Voyager, especially if the shields are being used to deflect radar signals.
Chris, "deflection" is precisely how radar works. It detects bounces from the target object, remember? Now, while these missiles are not currently designed for this purpose, it seems reasonable to me that they might be for this scenario, where the USN is gathered in one place to confront Voyager and has obviously been preparing.
What kind of maneuvering speed has Voyager ever demonstrated in atmosphere? Note: crashing and falling like a stone doesn't count. It seems to me that Fed ships handle like pigs in an atmosphere.The speed that Voyager can move at means that the only way you could possibly get her would be for her to stand still right above you in a predetermined location, making sure she doesn't try to either shoot down the missile, simply move twenty klicks to the left or kill the sub before she launches.
The only really "idiotic" thing about it, given the scenario, is that it presumes the USN has special guided nuclear airburst missiles.In short, that is the most idiotic idea I have heard in a long time.
Low-altitude bursts produce a source-region electromagnetic pulse (SREMP), which can be far more dangerous to military hardware than a HEMP due to the greater electric and magnetic fields produced within about 6 to 8 km of ground zero. From what I've read, the only things which were considered to be needed to be hardened against SREMP were missile launch stations. More information here.Sea Skimmer wrote:WTF are you defining as "traditional" EMP? A low altitude nuclear explosion produces very little in the way EMP, anything that would be significantly affected would also be smashed by the overpressure, and warships are protected against high altitude bursts which the Soviest where expected to use in action. Course a high altitude explosion isn't in "very close" proximity.
That depends on what figure you're using. I seem to remember settling on something like a few hundred kilotons. That would certainly produce major waves.Major waves require energy releases far beyond what a photo torpedo will give you.
There's a giant thread at SB.com about it if you're interested. Suffice to say "Think Tank" is wildly inconsistant, perhaps more so than TDiC.Darth Wong wrote:What exactly happened?Think tank is just....weird.
Link please?Howedar wrote:There's a giant thread at SB.com about it if you're interested. Suffice to say "Think Tank" is wildly inconsistant, perhaps more so than TDiC.Darth Wong wrote:What exactly happened?Think tank is just....weird.
Allow me.Ender wrote:Link please?
FAS is a reliable source of information since never. Browsing their WMD sections especially is a waste of time. But anyway, what that article says is exactly what I did, the only things at risk have bigger problems in the form of the blast wave and heat pulse.Durandal wrote:
Low-altitude bursts produce a source-region electromagnetic pulse (SREMP), which can be far more dangerous to military hardware than a HEMP due to the greater electric and magnetic fields produced within about 6 to 8 km of ground zero. From what I've read, the only things which were considered to be needed to be hardened against SREMP were missile launch stations. More information here.
Maybe over a small radius, however you need a very big wave to knock over a major warship, fleets have steamed through typhoons many times and the only vessels which have been lost in them in the past century weighed less then a modern frigate and where very low on fuel.That depends on what figure you're using. I seem to remember settling on something like a few hundred kilotons. That would certainly produce major waves.