Nukes are not enough.
They only contaminate dust. It disperses after a few months. I want total area denial. PERMANENT area denial. I want a dead man's zone between me and my enemies.
Nuclear meltdown by-products can effectively make a region untrespassable by man and vehicle. How can I weaponize he chernobyl accident?
You are the moronic
I agree
kys
>copium bombs
Cobalt bombs probably
A dirty bomb is limited by its mass.
Only the area around Chernobyl has pieces of radioactive reactor.
Isn't an entirely chunk of rest forest undiggable due corium shrapnel?
You gotta go in the direction of some eternally lasting pathogens waiting for a host. Some ultra giga deadly strain of antrax that can have live spores for over 100 years.
All nuclear fuel decays, either fast (which makes it deadly) or slow (which makes it way less deadly). So you gotta go with some bioweapon.
Or you just use more radioactive material instead :^)
That would be way less effective since you will need shitton of it, literally shitton. Developing some spores would be way cheaper than digging up all that cobalt
>That would be way less effective since you will need shitton of it, literally shitton
Doesn't most radioactive mass from the chernobyl remain inside the coffin?
Detonating that from below could achieve OP's end. But it limits you to stationary bombs.
The problem is that such radiation isn't deadly enough. In USSR during their first nuclear programm they dumped all the radioactive waste in the nearby river from which a bunch of villages drank water from. They even had some chernobyl style explosion. They still didn't tell much to the people nearby and let them live. Yes, they were sick and had sick kids with shorter life expectancy but they didn't die. It's not much different from pajeets who bathe in the chemical waste.
You gotta need a lot of sieverts to actually kill people.
>You gotta need a lot of sieverts to actually kill people.
Not just that, but you need more than twice as much to kill them in any kind of hurry. And since inverse square is a b***h, you need it either regularly spaced at equally insane doses, or just un fricking imaginable levels of radiation from a single source.
The most often quoted lethal level is LD 50/30. It's come up in hhis thread a couple times.
Here's the problem. LD50/30 is
>lethal dose
>for an average of 50% of exposed population
>over a 30 day time frame
>If NO MEDICAL INTERVENTION IS CONDUCTED
Literally just antibiotics is enough to drop it to acceptable loss of life for a serious industrial accident
Oh, and you need to reach something like LD50/60 for it to be relevant to humans because we work differently from lab animals (slower cell replacement)
To give tangible numbers, the often quoted lethal dose of gamma radiation is 450 REM acute dose. But for humans it's really more like 650 REM, and that's the 50% death figure over more than a month. So let's go up to commonly accepted nervous system death in humans, which is 1000 REM (we'll just take that academic number at face value, even though it's really much too low in reality.)
Let's say OP wants to kill someone before they can cross a 100yd "dead zone"
You can cover that in a couple minutes at a lazy walk. So OP needs to give someone 1000 REM of exposure in 2 minutes. Or, he needs a fricking 30,000 REM/hr source.
For reference, that's more than 40 of the highest powered industrial radiography sources I've ever personally fricked with, and I work in a nuclear power plant.
Okay, so OP needs 40 something super dangerous radiation sources.
Well, no, because that's only if you're practically holding them at arms length.
So you end up needing tens of millions of REM of gamma for every few yards of "radiation wall" you want to make. Imagine how much you'd need just to have a barrier a mile long down your border. Ten miles? A hundred?
It starts out insane and immediately devolves into high-school physics question moronic.
By the way, to drop someone on the spot, you'd really need three times those exposure rates.
Now we get to the "set and forget" problem.
That kind of decay rate is going to come from something with a pretty fricking short half life. So at best you get a few years at those strengths. Want to go 20+ years? Better double, triple, etc... the initial source strength. Even emptying a frick massive reactor like an RBMK1000 along your zone wouldn't cut it, you'd need dozens of them.
So yeah
>TL;DR Gamma radiation sucks mad ass at killing people and you can avoid alpha with a $90 gas mask and a shower.
How much plutonium does the UK store again I don't remember.
Cordium? They already dropped those on California.
are we talking here about the yellow line? I believe its made of carfentanyl
Build a housing project and populate it with Black folks.
The surrounding area will depopulate and will be uninhabitable for centuries.
Save the nukes for the 4th of July.
There's something oddly chilling about the fact that the dudes inside that photo, as well as the guy that took it, probably didn’t live for very long. The room with the elephant foot is probably one of the deadliest places on earth still.
Not really
>I want a dead man's zone between me and my enemies.
Maybe you are the problem.
>Maybe you are the problem.
Is the radiation killing my own people?
no?
why should I give a shit?
>why should I give a shit?
radiation rides with the wind, dumbass. which ever way it blows, the fallout eventually comes back to you.
I wager you could just take all of the fuel pellets out of a third burn fuel rod and sprinkle them around via plane. Use a shielded pilot's compartment and a hydraulic ram to load the dispersal hopper.
Eh, depends, you'd need a shit ton to make an area more than a few hundred yards long impassable. And you could just bulldoze it.
Mines are a much better solution.
> t. Radiation tech
>Mines are a much better solution.
huh? how? Mines aren't meant for people, ideally
And radiation sucks ass at incapacitating people. You'd need 18,000,000+ REM/hr object to have the same effect as a mine
I don't need them to drop dead on the spot anon, just make sure they'd wouldn't think of passing through.
Put up a fricking mine field and a scary sign with skulls and shit.
This is a hilariously moronic idea.
It would work though, cope gay
>Put up a fricking mine field and a scary sign with skulls and shit.
Point is to ensure, not threaten. I don't want neither an army or even the craziest wall jumping mexican managing to get past.
Then use nerve gas you dipshit.
It depends drastically on the reactor design. Although nothing we currently use is close to what is being discussed, a submarine reactor is probably the best analog. Especially since it uses 90%+ enriched fuel.
>cope gay
Black person I'm literally sitting in a nuclear plant right now.
>Then use nerve gas you dipshit.
Any firing mechanism needs to be supplied maintained, meaning it's not truly permanent as in "fire and forget (for 20 years at least) and there's a risk of system failure under constant pressure.
I'm open to non-radioactive alternatives. But I can't think of anything more permanent than just saturating the places with it.
>Although nothing we currently use is close to what is being discussed
So it's not feasible unless you make critical then detonate what's basically the largest nuclear fuel agglomeration in history.
Then are the stories of the russkies getting rad sickness in red forest trenches exaggerated?
The service at the top of the dunning Kruger peak must be fantastic for you to be posting up there.
jezz Black person I'll an ind. engineer next year, if I turn out to become such a no fun allowed c**t like you i'd rather kms.
>a college student for engineering is arguing with a senior Radiological Technician about biological radiation effects.
This jives with how the thread has been going so far
And the Technician is getting his panties in a bunch because someone in the anonymous weapons boards is having fun thinking up ridiculous weapons.
Who's the manchild here?
Me for reading through all of it
Autism is a job requirement for me and you're
>Wrong
>moronic
So of course I'm going to ridicule you
Here, I'll be fun, have a tiny hummer. Tiny hummers are fun.
Shit I get it, you think i'm the physics poster. Not only you are autistic, no fun, but also myopic.
Ooooooh, yep, I did. My bad.
>literally sitting in a nuclear plant right now
Pardon?
I mean, not anymore, my shift ended a couple hours ago.
Then don't use radiation.
>I want to kill a man at 3000yds in one shot guaranteed, what's the best way to do this with birdshot?
>Don't suggest a .50bmg, I want birdshot
Ok. How do I permanently make a 100km2 area so inhabitable it guarantees death just walking on it?
Nerve agents and biological warfare like super anthrax.
But you're still going to have the risk of people just rolling through it in an NBC rated vehicle, so mine the shit out if it.
And if you're already mining the shit out of it, why bother with the bio weapons?
So, minefields.
Both require constant attention and maintenance, effectivity gets lost on use.
Every year there's 10000 people crossing your border. Your objective is 0 crossings. You want to fire and forget, not constantly keep tabs on every meter of land and do maintenance and restocking on nerve gas and mines.
Anthrax is vastly overrated.
You realize radioactive material isn't permanent right? Like, you do understand what you're asking is kind of moronic? For what you want, radiation is quite possibly the worst tool for the job.
Permanent "enough". Consider a cost projection:.
>This taints the land effectively making sure no one can even dig a hole to shit for 20 years. You basically do nothing but watch people die for a decade.
>The second one requires permanent overwatch, storage of munition, maintenance and replacement of used munition and firing mechanism regardless of whether you use missiles or traps, and ofc personnel and capacitation
If you have a better alternative, I'm all ears. But until then, cobalt and corium seem best.
>Consider a cost projection
You first. Because HE and steel is a shit frick ton cheaper than refining more U235 than was used in every warhead in the US arsenal for the entire cold war.
cobalt is your friend
you're asking dangerously, anon.
Physicgay here, it wouldn't be difficult to make tbh.
You'd need to create a small reactor assembly, very compact, with the control rods fully inserted. A system could be devised that allows the wind as the bomb falls pulls them out, or they could be remote triggered once they land, doesn't matter. You really just need as much reactants as you can stuffed into it, and to let that shit melt itself.
Probably need to make a thick lead case to protect your aircrew, but you could very easily set that to fall away in transit too.
Pic is a diagram
Makes sense, but an air-carried payload would be limited in size. Say it's 1000kgs worth of product. What area could it hope to cover?
I'm not feeling extremely mathematical, but a ballpark? A city, atleast, is completely fricked within a day or two. People who evacuate same day will likely die of cancer regardless.
But honestly, my bad for imposing the limitation of an aircrew. Frick it, why don't we make it a suicide drone?
A ballpark for 1000kgs of corium? Damn. How much fuel+rod weight does a reactor have?
That's absolute fricking nonsense. Have you heard of chernobyl? The whole fricking reactor exploded, blowing itself inside out right next to a city of over 100,000 people. Whole fuel channels were projected hundreds of meters. A few tens of people died even though they didn't evacuate for nearly two days.
>inb4 muh linear zero threshold model
Don't listen to this bozo. Dirty bombs are not what they are cracked up to be. Any material that would make a good dirty bomb is so radioactive that it prohibits its assembly into a dirty bomb. They are also incredibly easy to detect, extremely conspicuous to collect the materials for, and deadly for the presumed user.
They don't work beyond shitty thrillers.
>inb4 muh linear zero threshold model
Hormesis chads, rise up and throw off your NRC oppressors!
moron, chernobyl exploded because of steam pressure. It wasn't a nuclear blast.
Fuel assemblies are about a 1,000lbs (500kg), and those have a lottafrickinuranium so do with that what you will.
You have absolutely fricking zero idea what you're talking about.
>It wasn't a nuclear blast.
Steam doesn't explode you goddamned fricking moron. Energy released from nuclear fission boiled the water.
It's like saying Hiroshima wasn't destroyed by a nuke, it was flattened by a freak windstorm and heat radiated from plasmafied air.
Please, throw your computer out the window, and cut your balls off too. People as dumb as you shouldn't communicate with others, nonetheless reproduce, gay.
Damn, we've got a real psued itt. It must suck to be fricking dunked on in front of everyone.
>I'd do the math, but actually, my dad works at Nintendo and I can't talk about it.
Pseudo
Intellectual
Midwit.
Dawg I drew a diagram of a bomb with a smile face using snapchat and explained a rough outline of how it could work while making Ramen and gave rough guesstimations because I didn't want to go through the process of doing shit.
Unlike you gay, this website isn't my life. I just threw a base idea for how OPs dream bomb could work while boiling water
>Unlike you gay, this website isn't my life. I just threw a base idea for how OPs dream bomb could work while boiling water
Kek, I'm technically boiling water too.
>Don't listen to this bozo. Dirty bombs are not what they are cracked up to be. Any material that would make a good dirty bomb is so radioactive that it prohibits its assembly into a dirty bomb. They are also incredibly easy to detect, extremely conspicuous to collect the materials for, and deadly for the presumed user.
>They don't work beyond shitty thrillers
How do you remember how to breathe
>I can't be bothered to do the math
Humor me, what math couldn't you be bothered to do? Just spitball the general equations and assumptions you were going to use to determine a meaningful lethality number.
Bet you $2 he uses LD50/50 or 50/30
I'd guess:
>Total activity in curies divided by LD50 for an equivalent ingested alpha emitter.
>Whoa guys, this kilo of fentanyl could kill everyone in LA if someone put it in the water treatment plant!!!1!1!1!
You're giving him way too much credit, he definitely doesn't know the difference between deep dose equivalent gamma and CEDE from transuranics.
It's not practical. If you really want to put a lot of persistent radiation somewhere you detonate a neutron enhanced bomb at very low altitude. Instead of hauling all the fallout, you neutron activate the ground directly.
HERR WINKLAAA
Migrate a bunch of Russians there. They're worse than radioactivity.
>ground bursts of deliberately inefficient nukes
>filthy thermobarics
>cobalt tsunamis (especially long lasting)
>striking the enemy's power plants, refineries and waste storage/disposal
>nuclear powered drone cruising around with an open reactor to crop dust areas
None of this stuff would work better than nerve gas or just good old fashioned mine fields.
They aren't permanent in a timeframe of decades.
Stick to what the OP said you daft c**t. How do you ensure maximum terrain irradiation within a given region?
fly a dirty nuclear ramjet back and forth over the area for as long as you want and then crash it into something for lols
cobalt is widely available to salt low yield nuclear bombs as a dead hand weapon, but as nagasaki and fukashima shows us the effects of fallout are overstated.
Yeah, 30 years later and it's basically gone. Dope heaven trips though, checked.
Mass Anthrax bombing would contaminate an area and make it uninhabitable for decades.
>Sprays concentrated bleach in your path.