Why didn't the US military or someone else ever develop Sundial and Gnomon?

Why didn't the US military or someone else ever develop Sundial and Gnomon? It's a two stage design where a 1000MT bomb sets off a 10000MT bomb.

Such a device could single-handedly bathe the entire earth in deadly radiation for decades.

Even if the enemy developed a counter to ICBMs, bombers and submarines they couldnt stop you from detonating it in your backyard and bringing them down with you

250 Piece Survival Gear First Aid Kit

LifeStraw Water Filter for Hiking and Preparedness

250 Piece Survival Gear First Aid Kit

  1. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Pointlessly destructive even for nukes

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      You wouldnt want some far away irrelevant country like Argentina to pick apart americas corpse after the war

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        I wouldn’t give an iota of a frick and neither would you fatass

  2. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    1. You can't launch a 10GT bomb, it would weight +1000 tons.
    2. after some point you're wasting energy heating the atmosphere, the space and over-cooking the ground. Cluster nukes are far better.
    3. Good job moron, you just salted the planet. Congratulation.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      it doesnt matter if you cant launch since the radiation has a global effect. salting the earth is the selling point

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >salt all of your allies
        Smart. Why would anyone be your friend if you were holding a gun to their head 24/7?

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          the USSR and NK have/had no allies

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >two shittiest countries in existence

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              NK is a workers paradise

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          >Why would anyone be your friend if you were holding a gun to their head 24/7?
          like israel holding a gun to the us

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            The rapture can’t happen if all israelites don’t return to Israel

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              what is the actual butt frick insane source for this? and does it say "Israelites" or does it actually say the "Jews" have to be back in Israel?

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                There isn't one. The rapture isn't sculptural and "Israel" in the new testament refers to the laity of the Christian church, not a nation-state full of talmudic israelites (which have no continuity with old testament israelites by the way). It's a simple case if protestants being too fricking silly for their own good and inventing false narratives out of thin air because they don't have a clergy to maintain their doctrine.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                Jews and Israelites are synonyms in the bible.

              • 1 month ago
                Official /pol/ Spokesman

                purposeful mistranslation of Judahites and Judeans.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >salting the earth is the selling point
        For whom, a psychopath with a death wish?

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      launch the parts into orbit and assemble it in space. You can just deorbit it whenever you want to deploy it.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        You do realize a mass like that will deorbit on its own in the event of any catastrophe overtaking its control station burn up in the atmosphere and dump plutonium particulate over the earth. That is if it does not blow up in the launcher or attempting orbit. Are you brown? A vatBlack person? Just a tard? Indians and Pakistanis with with nukes is like a four year old with a can of aerosol vx gas

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >can't launch a 10GT bomb, it would weight +1000 tons.
      Put it inside submarine. You can easily make submarine with 20000 tons payload.
      Park it to US coast.
      ...?
      Profit!

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        you forgot this part

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          How much longer must we wait?

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          American power fantasy

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Russian and Israeli nukes don't work.

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              Israel ICBMs use the same tech as their space launcher that altough it has smaller range it's probably one of the most tested ICBMs

              As for russia knowing that they been using liquid fuel for their rockets even if hypergolics you are probably right in that they may not work but they had a lot.

              Is that to scale, with regards to the maximum height of the ICBMs?

              it's most likely is all cold war icbm tech are basically space rockets were instead of a third stage you had a tiny last stage on a crash path to earth doing minor corrections or in the russian case dividing and sending multiple smaller bombs to avoid for any problems in the previous stage.

              They did achieve lot of attitude in fact even the houthis meme rockets reach space it's just that most people mix orbit with space, orbit is reaching space with enough velocity to not fall back.

              Rockets enter space but in a crash trajectory Minuteman 3 has a max attitude of 1100 kilometers while the international space station is around 420km of attitude.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          Is that to scale, with regards to the maximum height of the ICBMs?

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >1. You can't launch a 10GT bomb, it would weight +1000 tons.
      Ven you merely vish to bury bombs, zere is no limit to zeir size.

  3. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    shut up moron

  4. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    You've made this thread at least half a dozen times. The answer isn't going to fricking change.

  5. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    autistic mind obsessed with making the biggest boom is a very human story

  6. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    we already had this thread
    it's because it was moronic and had no useful application.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >it's because it was moronic and had no useful application.
      how is that different from any of the other ways they spend my tax dollars...

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        you aren't dead so they can still get more taxes from you. it's bad for them and us to kill everyone.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          If you’re facing an existential threat to your way of life like a communist takeover then it would be a good idea to use it

  7. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    because it gives the whole game away
    that nukes are only useful to ensure mutual suicide

  8. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    because such a weapon is cutting off your nose to spite your face, in addition to being cartoonishly evil. developing better delivery systems for your already-reliable nukes is a much better use of resources than a frickhuge nuclear suicide bomb. also, the tech advances made in the aforementioned r&d will benefit industry as a whole.

  9. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    The russians made a 100MT bomb meant to irradiate the oceans

  10. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    what a waste of useful fissile fuel.

  11. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    I actually am a little curious why someone wouldn't just do this and demand the entire world cater to the nation's demands under threat of ending the human race. Obviously it's evil but detonating bigger and bigger devices in succession somewhere remote until the world realizes you're serious surely would get results. I don't for one second believe it's because it's "too evil" because politicians do not have souls or consciences. I guess I'd buy the idea that the people around someone who'd do that would refuse and kill him out of self preservation maybe.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      A plan like that would get spotted by western glowBlack folk from a lightyear away and sabotaged to shit. I doubt there's actually enough fissiles and fusiles readily available in the world to make a boom bigger than a large asteroid impact. You might ignite a chunk of a continent with the thermal flash and rattle windows an ocean away, but there comes a point where the curvature of the earth begins to limit your reach. You can't eradicate humanity with a single warhead, you probably can't even significantly damage a single continent

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      You have a choice of believing you are wrong as all evidence points to you being wrong. Down to the fact that no one has ever fricking tried or much less started a project to do what you think politicians would. Or you can continue to be a schizo.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Calm down. It’s just because nobody is bold enough to do it

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Because they'd call their bluff. Nobody is stupid/crazy enough to willingly destroy the planet. "Give me 100 trillion dollars or I'll destroy the whole planet!" "Ok go ahead moron, then you definitely aren't getting your money and will also be dead."

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Then you call his bluff and blow kill each other. Since you will be close to the bomb you will have the instant death and he gets the slow radiation desth

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      What if some other nation builds a bigger doomsday bomb and threatens the original country with vaporization? Lol gottem

  12. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    It's fricking moronic to design something to blow up the entire planet when you LIVE ON THAT PLANET.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      If you know you’re already going to die the future doesn’t matter

  13. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >Why didn't the US military or someone else ever develop Sundial and Gnomon? It's a two stage design where a 1000MT bomb sets off a 10000MT bomb.
    >Such a device could single-handedly bathe the entire earth in deadly radiation for decades.
    >Even if the enemy developed a counter to ICBMs, bombers and submarines they couldnt stop you from detonating it in your backyard and bringing them down with you

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Strangelove actually rejected the concept of a Doomsday Device.
      >Under the authority granted me as Director of Weapons Research and Development, I commissioned last year a study of this project by the BLAND Corporation. Based on the findings of the report, my conclusion was that this idea was not a practical deterrent for reasons which at the this moment must be all too obvious.

  14. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    We have this thread every day and get outed as a fricking moron every day, are you not sick of it?

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      AM is the answer...or a few rocks.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Anti matter isn’t real. It’s just made up bullshit to account for errors in the Big Bang theory

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          Motherfricker what? CERN famously produced antimatter.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Bro, you don't need a particle accelerator to make antimatter. You just need a sufficiently high powered laser and a chunk of high z material.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            CERN was a cover story for secretly building the world's largest underground roller skating rink. WAKE UP SHEEPLE!!!

  15. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Because USA made nukes to win wars,not to lose them. What you suggest is sucide bombing. You will inflict more damage upon yourself than upon your enemy. Thats counterproductive.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >You will inflict more damage upon yourself than upon your enemy. Thats counterproductive.
      Ummm, what? If you detonate stuff at your enemy's position, and you are away from that position, the enemy will get damaged more than you.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Oops, forgot to say:
        Disregard OP's bullshit about "detonating it at your own backyard", just fling it at your enemy, it will probably detonate closer to him than to you.
        >yes, I hate the world, how could you tell?

  16. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Because whichever country decided to build it would be immediately nuked by every other nation that doesn't want to live under the thumb of the builder.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Well frick them. What if THEY built it? Do you really want to be under THEIR thumb?

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Hey Germany in 1939

  17. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >why didn't the military make a device that would frick itself over as well

  18. 1 month ago
    Anonymous
  19. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Its ridiculously not effective and it's better to split the resources and science points onto the fleet of rockets with S-M-L size warheads.
    1) It hits you first first and your enemies second. Activation of this device gives your enemies more chances to see the other day.
    2) If the US is ready to accept the self-destruction, the current conventional and nuclear capabilities will still give us higher chances to win the world war with less victims.
    3) You can achieve deadly radiation levels without detonation of 10GT, just use a "conventional" warhead of 20MT on iron/nickel ore basin and let physics do the rest.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Bombing a mine won’t increase the amount of fallout it just makes it last longer

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >20 MT
        Explosion 1000 feet beneath the ground may be considered a surface explosion for this yield.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          Ok but you won’t be getting more fallout than a 10 GT bomb buried under sand. Only difference will be the fallout has a longer half life

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            More fallout, but same or even less radiation. Why would you waste a 10 GT wunderwaffe on the job of a 20 MT warhead?

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              Because you could put the wunderwaffen in a mine and have more fallout and longer lasting radiation

  20. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >the US military or someone else
    Turning your country into analogue of potassium belter shakheed is definitely not our strategy. Maybe will work for Russia and Iran though.

  21. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >the enemy developed a counter to ICBMs, bombers and submarines
    >they couldnt stop you from detonating it in your backyard
    I doubt it. If the enemy can counter ICBMs, he can probably strike any target inside your territory.
    I also don't believe you will be able to refine 10 GT-worth of tritium and stay unnoticed by the glowies, so with countered ICBMs and submarines he will launch a nuclear attack as soon as he gets your plans.

  22. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    that's the most israeli thing i've ever heard of
    do not want

  23. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    There have been 2,121 tests done since the first in July 1945, involving 2,476 nuclear devices. As of 1993, worldwide, 520 atmospheric nuclear explosions (including 8 underwater) have been conducted with a total yield of 545 megaton (Mt): 217 Mt from pure fission and 328 Mt from bombs using fusion, while the estimated number of underground nuclear tests conducted in the period from 1957 to 1992 is 1,352 explosions with a total yield of 90 Mt. We are all still here

  24. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Why do you think, you stupid b***h? It's every day, the same thing with you, even though you know the answer perfectly well. You're like a shortbus child.

  25. 1 month ago
    Anonymous
  26. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Call us when you can start pumping teratones.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      That could shatter the planet. 10000GT would already expose earths core

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >Dino killer
        >126 Tt
        >Smallest of the 3 major impactors since the Hadean Era
        Did you mean Exa Tones?...No, that would just the oceans.

  27. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    nukes are fake and gay

  28. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    turns out weapons are not useful if they kill your enemies and also the rest of the planet.

  29. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >by the late 50s there was already lots of talk about how larger yields beyond 5MT were overkill and almost no target couldn't be serviced by a smaller yield than 5MT
    >early proposals for MIRVs showed that smaller yields spread in a pattern were more destructive than a single large yield
    >if you're going to fight a war it's nice to be able to survive it even if you do lose
    p simple

  30. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    did someone say Chicxulub

  31. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >It's a two stage design where a 1000MT bomb sets off a 10000MT bomb.
    >Such a device could single-handedly bathe the entire earth in deadly radiation for decades.
    >Are you sure this will increase our national security?
    >National security?

  32. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    keyed idea

  33. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Hi Dr. Teller

  34. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Gnome?

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *