There have been several underwater atomic tests: the BAKER shot in Bikini Atoll in 1946, the WIGWAM shot off California in 1955, the UMBRELLA shot and the WAHOO shot at Enewetak in 1958.

BAKER was a 20 kiloton atomic bomb detonated 200 feet below the surface in a shallow lagoon. It generated a 90 foot wave 1000 feet from the detonation. However, that wave was only 6 feet high 22000 feet from the detonation.

WIGWAM was a 30 kiloton atomic bomb detonated 2000 feet below the surface. The official report on WIGWAM does not mention any significant waves from the explosion.

UMBRELLA was a 8 kiloton atomic bomb detonated 150 feet below the surface. WAHOO was a 9 kiloton atomic bomb detonated 500 feet below the surface. The official reports on UMBRELLA and WAHOO do not mention any significant waves from the detonation.

The difference between the WIGWAM and WAHOO deep water tests is that the bubble created by the explosion broadens and can collapse before reaching the surface thus limiting the wave generated at the surface.

The following link show the conclusions of atomic testing on the damage effects on ships:

https://nige.files.wordpress.com/2009/06/caw1960-8.pdf

One conclusion is that underwater atomic explosions do damage at twice the distance as air or surface explosions. The damage is not so much due to waves but to the blast wave being transmitted through water to the ship hull and secondary effects like hogging.

One thing to note about all the underwater shots: fallout was limited by the water and in the case of the deep underwater explosions, little fallout was released in the air.

Compare the above tests to the 15 kiloton Hiroshima bomb. Severe damage to builds occurred within a 1 mile radius and firestorm was started with a radius of about 2 miles. The bomb did severe damage to a greater area than could be expected to be done with an underwater detonation.

The Russian air force are now flying over Estonia, Europe, intercepted by RAF Typhoons. I take it without need or permission?

RAF Typhoons intercept Russian aircraft near Estonia border

An ancient picture from your wiki article.

There was also a T-15 project, but... how does it relate to the Rayleigh scattering? Ah? :helpme

They were always flying over Europe, because more than 40% of Europe is... located in Russia ;)

i dont know why you use this "crony" stuff like its some kind of insult, every reasonably educated american knows where a lot of our money goes... to the war machine.

but at least we are real about it, your country is ran by mafioso's, KGB agents and oligarchs... how is that better?

make no doubt our war machine could kick the living fuck out of yours. so you can keep coming back with retarded as pie in the sky ideas about how you might be able to stand a chance and do a bit of damage, but long story short, RU is still a has been and its just a puppy trying to fuck our legs for attention.

Not better at all. Same shit - different faces. If you think that I like Putin more than Obama, you are soooooo wrong :1orglaugh

just poking holes in your nuclear tsunami strategy.

also, i'm not going to try and act like i'm a laser expert but according to google, USA is well on its way to viable laser weapons.

I did never mention anything about "nuclear tsunami strategy" and personally I do consider it pretty ineffective (too much efforts for a small effect). Please read the thread carefully. I've just posted a note that laser technologies are extremely limited by out atmosphere and every kid, who has learned basics of physics knows that. Believe me, the one don't has to be a rocket scientist to understand a principle of Rayleigh scattering. That's a standard middle school course. Yeah, at least in my country...

not that ancient, Lysenko theories were still believed 50-60 years ago in soviet official science.......

i lump all you slav nuclear high fivvers together. you don't hesitate to bring up nukes, i don't differentiate the different types of nuclear attacks you threaten about, a nuke attack is a nuke attack.

I don't understand what you are trying to say. Perhaps my English is so weak for your clever ideas. Sorry.

Have no single idea about this shit. I'm not that old. I have no single idea who that Lysenko was and why should I know anything about him :)

yes, keep regaling us with your wild stories about rayleigh scattering



Navy: New laser weapon works, ready for action - CNN.com

A steam engine works too, but it's very ineffective, just like those toy laser systems :2 cents:

P.S. I like how easily you rename a physical law into a "wild story". I feel the power of the famous American comics education :thumbsup

https://image.freepik.com/free-vecto...2147493624.jpg

thats some serious quora science right there :thumbsup

US fleet vs. 100s or 1000s of nukes....I would not bet on the US fleet :2 cents:

because its good to know history to better understand present, and not live like a cockroach whose only excitement is because of new phone, damn it !
:winkwink::winkwink:

Pretty cool clip. The chopper in the other video is Bad Ass

Two eastern european punks with big dreams :1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh

Lets drink to that!

http://s018.radikal.ru/i514/1206/f1/e64881c0a58a.jpg

yes, in your shellshocked dream land you drop 1000s of nukes to sink a US flotilla.

I would feel bad to charge anything at all for you dear wife Svetlana.
:1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh

http://www.laserpointersafety.com/ne...en-cyclops.png

http://static.comicvine.com/uploads/...2246-15018.jpg

http://www.writeups.org/wp-content/u...rs-Early-a.jpg

I know & it gets so close to the ship right :helpme

..i do not want WW3.

what does Rayleigh scattering have to do with anything? gravity exists too, and yet engineers came up with solutions to make aircraft fly... that's what scientists/engineers do...

spend 2 minutes on google and you will find videos of laser weapons popping missiles / artillery shells / etc from miles away, here is one for example:





and that's with some weak-ass 10 kW proof-of-concept laser running from a back of a truck... now imagine harvesting even fraction of the 100s of MW that a nuclear reactor on a ship is generating into a laser beam and you will see where the technology is headed... :2 cents:

ivan drago

Note my P.S. here: https://gfy.com/20906087-post90.html - you are not first who tries to use lasers for military purposes - these are technologies from 70's (been there, seen that, done that). So, good luck on learning physics. First of all just try to find out what efficiency does mean ;)

How old are you? The higher power does not mean the higher result when we are talking about lasers, operating in the atmosphere. Let me step to your level and explain it in a different way. Consider the laser beam power like a human body, falling down to the ground. It doesn't matter if it was 100 km or only 1 km height: the speed of that body will be the same - not more than 240 km/h. There are limits of atmosphere for both: falling bodies and laser beams.

Not going to happened. Russian oligarchs heavily vested in western economies and real estate. Most of them live or have their families in EU or USA. Putin is bluffing.

what do your failed attempts at creating some advanced weapons have to do with anything? I know what efficiency is, care to clarify what it has to do with anything in this context?

not surprised at all, obviously higher power means lower result... but only in Russia... :error

Do not forget russian internets satelites technology! :thumbsup

Only on a planet which has such a thing like the atmosphere (e.g. Earth). You can't jump over the physical limits. Once again: how old are you and did you complete a middle school?

P.S. Even a power of explosion drops as a square-root of the distance. Getting back to your level: a power of a shock wave with a force of 100 Pa will be only 10 Pa in a meter away of it's epicenter. That's a world we live in... But you can always count on them:

http://cdn1-www.comingsoon.net/asset...alypseimax.jpg

Look at you go, Boris

3:07 AM
Friday, May 20, 2016 (GMT+3)
Time in Moscow, Russia

http://i.imgur.com/5phM97i.gif]

I like this gif, thanks :1orglaugh :thumbsup

Unfortunately I go to sleep at about 7 AM (

laser = technology fail...

missiles can be like 10 meters long, how hard would it be to fire TEN with say 3 meters worth of fuel and 7 meters of steel...melt that bitch! travelling at mach 15 the kinetic energy of the hit would vaporize a ship :1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh
fail

US army = fail

f
a
i
l

the americans did not think that one out, they acted on impulse, lucas made star wars, they got stoked "merica! lasers!"

fail...

:1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh

or a shot gun type of missle with like 1000s of pool ball sized steel balls travelling at mach 15, the moment the missile is within the lasers puny range it bursts and swiss cheeses the waste of money US boaty mc boat face...

lasers = fail

fleet = sink :1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh

amazing machinery & equipment :thumbsup

Technically isn't it the power behind the laser that creates the distance due to the capacity of power inside. Yes, there are limitations, as you say. But with a larger pointer, the lens or the part of where the beam is shone & the power behind the laser, would create a further beam & project a hotter burn as it penetrates the object.
It's not the same as a person, small or big falling other wise you could estimate it similar to a feather falling against a round object weighing as much as a feather. The feather will float & drift down, the round object would fall direct, yet they weigh the same.

Although you're right about the different atmospheric pressures could change the speed & distance :2 cents:

Doesn't this one look similar? ;)

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped...0%B5%D1%82.JPG

That's a technology of 1980 (was already done by Soviets when I was a kid) and those are just military toys and nothing more.

It's hard to explain, but laser technologies work well as pew-pew guns in Sci-Fi movies only, but not on planet Earth. I've tried to explain in above, but seems it doesn't work for the people who calls physical law a "wild story". That's like speaking with people who've got their education in some village parish school.

Do you think why all world armies still use old good bullets and missiles instead of this:

http://cf.ltkcdn.net/toys/images/std...-Laser_gun.jpg

There must be a reason, right? :winkwink:

missiles need to have sensors in front, unless they are guided from behind from the launching site...

sensors in front = trivially easy to burn them out
guided from behind = susceptible to electronic counter measures, jamming, etc

fail / fail

Inertial control, hyperbolic navigation etc? Not, haven't heard about that :winkwink:

yea, against targets moving at 40mph+... good luck with that...

5 tons of concrete travelling at mach 15 has the kinetic energy of 10 metric tons of TNT...ten such missiles are like 100 metric tons of TNT

They can hit approximately LOL you are not going to have a good time...

Now imagine ten of them loaded with metal balls like basketballs going your way...mach 15...a 40 kg ball would be equal to like 180lb of tnt at that speed...not a good time...

Fail\fail\fail

Also if the sensors are on the front the missile can fly up high as a mother fucker and when it is directly above, then down...str8 down with a payload of 20 tons of pig shit,thats 80tons TNT kinetic energy does not care LOL

yea, and hit the target within a mile if you are lucky... :error

strategy like that is only useful with nuclear weapons, but those are as useful as pulling out a grenade at a bar fight... yea, you will kill your adversary, but you will be dead too... completely pointless strategy, unless you are suicidal or have a way of stopping the 1000s of nukes that seconds later will be coming your way... which with current technology, no one does...

If I was pooty I would make massive 100 ton missiles that are filled with shit, they would fly up and then directly down and it would detonate say two miles above to scatter the shit and it would rain shit on you and you would be covered in 100s of tons of shit and would be forced to go home LOL

Looks like it worked fine on your gypsy asses. 17 years later we can still hear butthurt serbs whining :1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh

http://i.imgur.com/mZu8g1L.jpg

That the whole place would look like Serbia ! :1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh

:1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh

I would "brown sky" the US fleet 24/7 they would be so shit soaked the USA would not want to take them back :1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh

You would run away. Thats what Serbs do :1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh

hahah briliant:1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh

you are smart lady ! :1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh
I bet that you had A+ in school in physics:1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh