![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On May 5, 1:53 pm, "Arved Sandstrom" wrote:
In reality, with either a CSG or ESG, you'll have ships very far apart. Any one nuclear weapon may be bad news for one or two ships, a few more won't like it, and the rest will be relatively unscathed. Unless, as you say, the enemy uses some rather stupendous weapons. The real problem is not that one or two nuclear weapons (let's say they are medium-size fission weapons) is going to wreck the entire fleet, but that your high-value assets may be mission-killed. A 50 kT airburst 3-4 km from your CVN is not going to be conducive to continued flights ops in the near or medium future. During Cold War preparations, it was assumed that nukes would be used against CVBGs in the North Sea. The blast radius of a nuke with the accuracy necessary to hit a ship was deemed small enough that only the target ship would be mission killed. The other ships in the group would be far enough away from each other to be somewhat unscathed by the blast, and free to maneuver to avoid the fallout and/or conduct washdown procedures. The washdown system on the Nimitz class is even designed to wash fallout off aircraft that are parked on the deck. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On May 8, 3:52 pm, Airyx wrote:
On May 5, 1:53 pm, "Arved Sandstrom" wrote: In reality, with either a CSG or ESG, you'll have ships very far apart. Any one nuclear weapon may be bad news for one or two ships, a few more won't like it, and the rest will be relatively unscathed. Unless, as you say, the enemy uses some rather stupendous weapons. The real problem is not that one or two nuclear weapons (let's say they are medium-size fission weapons) is going to wreck the entire fleet, but that your high-value assets may be mission-killed. A 50 kT airburst 3-4 km from your CVN is not going to be conducive to continued flights ops in the near or medium future. During Cold War preparations, it was assumed that nukes would be used against CVBGs in the North Sea. The blast radius of a nuke with the accuracy necessary to hit a ship was deemed small enough that only the target ship would be mission killed. The other ships in the group would be far enough away from each other to be somewhat unscathed by the blast, and free to maneuver to avoid the fallout and/or conduct washdown procedures. The washdown system on the Nimitz class is even designed to wash fallout off aircraft that are parked on the deck. Right into the ocean! Sweet! |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On May 11, 9:57 am, shrubkiller wrote:
The washdown system on the Nimitz class is even designed to wash fallout off aircraft that are parked on the deck. Right into the ocean! Sweet! So right! How could they dare to dump that waste into the ocean... where 99% of the fallout from the blast landed already... BB I guess everybody has some mountain to climb, it's just fate whether you live in Tibet or Kansas... |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Perfect Storm Brewing in the Persian Gulf | [email protected] | Naval Aviation | 2 | November 19th 06 02:48 AM |
Bush Iran War Plans - 4 Strike Groups in the Persian Gulf | Airyx | Naval Aviation | 13 | November 1st 06 01:08 AM |
Top Military Officer, Celebrities Visit Nimitz in Persian Gulf | Otis Willie | Naval Aviation | 0 | August 22nd 05 10:12 PM |
USS Nimitz in the Persian Gulf ! Update Airshow Action Photo Gallery | Peter Steehouwer | Military Aviation | 0 | July 6th 03 11:07 PM |
USS Nimitz in the Persian Gulf ! Update Airshow Action Photo Gallery | Peter Steehouwer | Naval Aviation | 0 | July 6th 03 11:07 PM |