2013-07-04, 06:22 | Link #701 |
Sleepy Lurker
Graphic Designer
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Nun'yabiznehz
Age: 38
|
That'd depend on how critical mass is achieved - not all nuclear warheads share the same shape (the W88 warhead, for example, has a prolate primary and a spherical secondary, which is a deviation from the traditional Teller-Ulam design) and the detonation process is unique (usually there are shaped charges that are activated at extremely precise intervals in order to compress the fissile material and the fuel into a specific shape, appropriate for nuclear reactions) for each model (not to mention: what are the risks of seawater interfering with the fission process? could it act as an instant moderator? will the presence of water cause a fizzle instead of a full-blown explosion?).
As for reaching the required depths, well, we do have some subs around (remember that James Cameron did very recently reach the bottom of the Mariana Trench himself aboard the Deepsea Challenger bathyscaphe) and the military, in the past, have used some crude but highly efficient ways to create extremely sturdy weapons. For example, during Operation Desert Storm, the first GBU-28 bunker buster bombs dropped in Kuwait were made out of artillery barrels (deactivated M110 howitzers), which were thick and heavy enough to punch through several meters of reinforced concrete (later versions of the GBU-28 were purpose-built, though), so it's not unthinkable that the military would choose a similar approach to build a high pressure-resistant bomb. Heck, they could even stash a nuke inside a bathyscaphe and remote-pilot the sub straight into the portal if need be. So...if a single country can dedicate a hundred billion dollars to build a top-of-the-line Jaeger, what precludes the rest of the world from building a bathyscaphe-like nuke? It's far more affordable. But then again, getting the said vehicle close to or inside the darn portal (assuming it's not constantly moving AND that it's permanently open) is a bigger problem. We don't know what powers the darn hole between dimensions either, so the only thing the deep sea nuke might achieve is make a dull, underwater fart.
__________________
Last edited by Renegade334; 2013-07-04 at 06:36. |
2013-07-04, 21:40 | Link #707 |
The Dark Knight
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: From the deepest abyss in the world, where you think?
Age: 38
|
So why does Gipsy Danger get to show off it's cannon but Crimson Typhoon doesn't?
And why is it that we haven't got to see much of Crimson Typhoon? Coyote Tango granted is in a flashback but aside from Cherno getting it's butt kicked in almost every trailer we haven't seen much of the Typhoon. |
2013-07-04, 22:17 | Link #708 | |
Sensei, aishite imasu
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Hong Kong Shatterdome
|
Quote:
__________________
|
|
2013-07-04, 22:32 | Link #709 |
The Dark Knight
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: From the deepest abyss in the world, where you think?
Age: 38
|
Hopefully it doesn't turn out like Transformers where it's just the one robot that does all the fighting...
On that matter, good news for Canadians http://ca.movies.yahoo.com/news/paci...191217963.html |
2013-07-05, 02:42 | Link #713 |
Secret Society BLANKET
Graphic Designer
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: 3 times the passion of normal flamenco
|
Well, I think they do, since it makes them feel more like palm blasters. That, and I heard (unconfirmed) that Gipsy does a plasma punch in the movie at some point.
Also, have a Tacit Ronin gif:
__________________
|
Tags |
bad ass, mecha, monster |
|
|