User Controls
Russian Bomb Engineering
-
2018-09-10 at 3:36 PM UTC
The SVP-24 then computes an “envelope” (speed, altitude, course) inside which the dumb bombs are automatically released exactly at the precise moment when their unguided flight will bring them right over the target (with a 3-5m accuracy).
In practical terms this means that every 30+ year old Russian “dumb” bomb can now be delivered by a 30+ year old Russian aircraft with the same precision as a brand new guided bomb delivered by a top of the line modern bomber.
Not only that, but the pilot does not even have to worry about targeting anything. He just enters the target’s exact coordinates into his system, flies within a defined envelope and the bombs are automatically released for him. He can place his full attention on detecting any hostiles (aircraft, missiles, AA guns). And the best part of this all is that this system can be used in high altitude bombing runs, well over the 5000m altitude which MANPADs cannot reach. Finally, clouds, smoke, weather conditions or time of the day play no role in this whatsoever.
Last, but not least, this is a very *cheap* solution. Russian can now use the huge stores of ‘dumb’ bombs they have accumulated during the Cold War, they can bring an infinite supply of such bombs to Syria and every one of them will strike with phenomenal accuracy. And since the SVP-24 is mounted on the aircraft and not the bomb, it can be reused as often as needed.
https://thesaker.is/technology-sitrep-how-russian-engineering-made-the-current-operation-in-syria-possible/
TLDR Americans build their electronics into their bombs, while Russians build them on their aircraft. -
2018-09-10 at 5:30 PM UTCinteresting
would drive down costs of munitions too, though I don't think the western MICs would care much for that -
2018-09-10 at 7:23 PM UTCniggerThe following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire!
-
2018-09-10 at 7:32 PM UTC
Originally posted by apt There's a reason the Russians became chess masters while the US was busy building its bloated and wasteful military-industrial complex.
Very true, The Russians had to learn how to be effective and efficient with the resources they had, while America was fucking around with 1.4 million bucks a pop tomahawk bullshit and what have you. -
2018-09-10 at 7:42 PM UTC
^ And that's at only 50% yield.
-
2018-09-10 at 8:49 PM UTCsay what you want about the russians as a people but they make some mighty fine weaponry
-
2018-09-10 at 11:30 PM UTC
-
2018-09-10 at 11:34 PM UTC
Originally posted by -SpectraL The Germans also made some pretty far out weapons. They actually invented the nuclear bomb first.
Are you comparing a gun that destroyed one building at a time to a nuclear bomb?
A Stalin Organ/Multiple Rocket Launcher mounted on a truck is several times as deadly as this rail mounted fail cannon. -
2018-09-10 at 11:48 PM UTC
Originally posted by MORALLY SUPERIOR BEING 2.0 - The GMO Reckoning Are you comparing a gun that destroyed one building at a time to a nuclear bomb?
A Stalin Organ/Multiple Rocket Launcher mounted on a truck is several times as deadly as this rail mounted fail cannon.
My point is they could have easily loaded a few nuclear bomb test prototypes as ammo. This gun fires 7 ton rounds at 30 miles. -
2018-09-11 at 12:19 AM UTC
Originally posted by -SpectraL My point is they could have easily loaded a few nuclear bomb test prototypes as ammo. This gun fires 7 ton rounds at 30 miles.
Even ignoring the engineering problems of strengthening a nuclear bomb enough to survive being shot out of a cannon, there is the small problem that Nazi Germany didn't even have enough fissionable material of any isotope to make a nuclear bomb of any design, nor the capacity to make such in any reasonable time frame.
The war was lost before it even began. WW2 was an enormous waste of men and materiel. -
2018-09-11 at 12:22 AM UTC
-
2018-09-11 at 12:23 AM UTCThe following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire!
-
2018-09-11 at 12:28 AM UTC
Originally posted by MORALLY SUPERIOR BEING 2.0 - The GMO Reckoning Are you confusing Germany's nuclear bomb project with the Holocaust?
Radionuclide has existed since the founding of the world. There are natural nuclear reactors in operation as we speak. It's not as if they did not have the capability to capture and store it in the '40's. -
2018-09-11 at 12:33 AM UTC
Originally posted by -SpectraL Radionuclide has existed since the founding of the world.
Yeah aren't most nuclides radionuclides?There are natural nuclear reactors in operation as we speak.
On Earth? Are there? Where?It's not as if they did not have the capability to capture and store it in the '40's.
Yes, it is as if. -
2018-09-11 at 12:39 AM UTC
-
2018-09-11 at 12:57 AM UTC
Originally posted by -SpectraL
And?
In case we aren't clear, they weren't even close to getting enough material to make a bomb.
This 1945 German nuclear research work is far below that which Enrico Fermi achieved in Chicago in 1942, and by 1945 Germany was in full-on implosion mode due to the jedis attacking it from every angle.
Even if the 1945 work resulted in maximum success, they still would have had to invest billions plus several years to produce a Hanford style reactor + Los Alamos to produce nuclear fuel enough to produce a bomb.
The idea that the World Wars were closely run things is a pure fiction. Germany started losing out on the first day of each war, and their disadvantage just grew and grew and grew as each war went on. Only Germany's capacity to absorb limitless, pointless, inhuman, suffering disguises this fact.
A society that will literally let a generation of their own young people be wiped out doesn't deserve to survive. -
2018-09-11 at 9:53 PM UTC
Originally posted by MORALLY SUPERIOR BEING 2.0 - The GMO Reckoning Are you comparing a gun that destroyed one building at a time to a nuclear bomb?
A Stalin Organ/Multiple Rocket Launcher mounted on a truck is several times as deadly as this rail mounted fail cannon.
Yeah, but the thing did have like 60+ kilometer range, so they could shell enemy positions without having to endure a counter barrage. Oh and they could literally shell southern England from across the North Sea, lmao. -
2018-09-11 at 9:57 PM UTCJust imagine being inside the concrete bunker when a 7-ton hail Mary projectile smashes into it.
-
2018-09-12 at 2:58 AM UTC
Originally posted by Sophie Yeah, but the thing did have like 60+ kilometer range, so they could shell enemy positions without having to endure a counter barrage. Oh and they could literally shell southern England from across the North Sea, lmao.
Yes but when you add up the cost of building and maintaining the gun, moving it around, manning it, and building projectiles for it, anything you blow up with it better be worth a lot of money.
