Would you survive a nuke?

[Grey Fox]

What's that one halfway between Columbus and the PA border? There's nothing there but tiny places like Coshocton.

Cambridge.  Not important as a city, but it's the intersection of I-70 and I-77.

So they're going to spend a nuke to take out a cloverleaf interchange?

Eh, apparently we're spending 25 of them carpeting the border.

[ulmont]

Newark getting hit by a nuke would improve it.

Big surprise they're filming portions of The Dark Knight Rises in Newark as Gotham, right?

They filmed parts of the Walking Dead in downtown Atlanta.  Didn't even need set dressing to look post-apocalyptic.

[viper37]

Using the dinosaur killing bomb, I got this:

Congratulations! You never saw it coming. Consider yourself lucky that there was no suffering. Not even the cockroaches survived.

Otherwise, I always survive.

[Razgovory]

Yeah, the targeting assumptions are just stupid.

I read something back in the mid-70's that the places that were considered likely targets in the U.S. were:

All capital cities
All other cities over 25,000 in population
All important military bases
Certain industrial locations and transportation hubs that aren't in any of the cities already included above.

Of course, that was when nuclear arsenals were a bit larger than they are now--I don't know if cities that small would still be considered likely targets.   But certainly important military bases would be.

I'm not sure the Soviets could reliably hit cities with only 25,000 people.

[Ideologue]

I'm sure they could.  Hitting a city, even a small city, is rather easy.  And they used larger warheads then to compensate for accuracy anyway.

[Razgovory]

I'm sure they could.  Hitting a city, even a small city, is rather easy.  And they used larger warheads then to compensate for accuracy anyway.

How easy is it?  As far as I know, nobody has ever hit a city with an ICBM.

[Ideologue]

I'm sure they could.  Hitting a city, even a small city, is rather easy.  And they used larger warheads then to compensate for accuracy anyway.

How easy is it?  As far as I know, nobody has ever hit a city with an ICBM.

Most cities of 25,000 are bigger than 1km across.  Even the SS-11 could manage that, and that's a very old missile (although it remained in service in decreasing numbers through 1994).  It also carried a 1.1MT warhead.

But you're right.  I think we should hold some trials.  You have any cities in mind?

[crazy canuck]

But you're right.  I think we should hold some trials.  You have any cities in mind?

Where does Sandusky live again? 

[Ideologue]

Ghent.

[Razgovory]

I'm sure they could.  Hitting a city, even a small city, is rather easy.  And they used larger warheads then to compensate for accuracy anyway.

How easy is it?  As far as I know, nobody has ever hit a city with an ICBM.

Most cities of 25,000 are bigger than 1km across.  Even the SS-11 could manage that, and that's a very old missile (although it remained in service in decreasing numbers through 1994).  It also carried a 1.1MT warhead.

But you're right.  I think we should hold some trials.  You have any cities in mind?

I read that Soviet ICBM tended to carry big warheads because their accuracy was somewhat limited.  When shooting something like that off even a small deviation can result a major miss. 

I recommend a Bangkok.

[dps]

What's that one halfway between Columbus and the PA border? There's nothing there but tiny places like Coshocton.

Cambridge.  Not important as a city, but it's the intersection of I-70 and I-77.

So they're going to spend a nuke to take out a cloverleaf interchange?

See my earlier post #54.  And keep in mind that the Interstate highway system was supposed to be a defense measure (in fact, its official name was the Interstate and Defense Highway System).

[Valdemar]

Those maps are funny as they represent both a truth and a gigantic miss conception of the militarily important parts of Denmark (Or lack there off if you wish )

The allied map expects the sovs to hit some of the military targets in Jutland that the Sovs doesn't even consider in their approach, and neither takes out the only true dangers of Denmark, the navy and its ability to block the warsaw block from leaving the baltic And the large airfields and their ability to support reinforcements from UK/US, not to mention the large container harbours that would float supplies right into the warzone.

Denmark it self is of no consequence to the war effort. its position and assets for the rest of the allies.. a little bit more.

V

[Sophie Scholl]

Apparently the closest a nuke would come in their estimation is Syracuse, leaving me alive because "you live in the middle of nowhere or are lucky.  The planet isn't looking good though.  Get ready for some great skiing in the upcoming nuclear winter!"  Apparently everyone has forgotten Griffiss AFB in very close by Rome, NY exists.

[Syt]

The allied map

Actually, both maps are based on Soviet war plans.

[Valdemar]

The allied map

Actually, both maps are based on Soviet war plans.

OK, I thought the one where NATO attacked first was based on their plans. Strange they don't hit the same targets in both plans when it comes to capitals and strategic bases.

V