Las Malvinas Argentinas??

User avatar
Mike
More than 10 000 messages. Soldier you are the leader of all armies!
Posts: 12409
Joined: Thu 20 Feb 2014 01:09
Location: Virginia, United States of America
Contact:

Re: Las Malvinas Argentinas??

Postby Mike » Tue 29 Mar 2016 21:48

GBNATO wrote:
Mike wrote:Ronald Reagan returns from the grave to assist the British with a Carrier Group.


We're working on it! Not that I imagine we'd need one, it's a bit overkill don't you think?


Overkill? If you want overkill we'll reactivate the Iowas! :lol:
Image
Courtesy of KattiValk

User avatar
Vulcan 607
Major-General
Posts: 3911
Joined: Mon 31 Mar 2014 20:40
Location: Malton
Contact:

Re: Las Malvinas Argentinas??

Postby Vulcan 607 » Tue 29 Mar 2016 21:52

Mike wrote:
GBNATO wrote:
Mike wrote:Ronald Reagan returns from the grave to assist the British with a Carrier Group.


We're working on it! Not that I imagine we'd need one, it's a bit overkill don't you think?


Overkill? If you want overkill we'll reactivate the Iowas! :lol:


One type 45 assuming it's engines work can destroy the entire Argentine navy and airforce single handed though to be fair so can a single typhoon.

Cheesehead
Chief Warrant Officer
Posts: 530
Joined: Sun 5 Jan 2014 07:21
Contact:

Re: Las Malvinas Argentinas??

Postby Cheesehead » Wed 30 Mar 2016 03:14

delfo wrote:
Vulcan 607 wrote:
Man if only they had some functioning fuses they would have actually won.


The fuses worked it's just that they didn't buy the manual to tell them how to set them to low altitude cheap buggers


And my English IT sec course teacher at University told me it was because of the exchange of the data on the exocet. But that could be another myth.[/quote]

The Air Force and Navy didn't get along which led to the fusing problem since I think the Navy knew how to fuse stuff correctly however they didn't play well with the Air Force. It's a pretty good case example on how inter-service politics and lack of "jointness" can doom a campaign.

There was e rumblings of selling some SU-24's a couple years ago but I think that deal fell through.
Image

ikalugin
More than 10 000 messages. Soldier you are the leader of all armies!
Posts: 10430
Joined: Sun 6 Nov 2011 01:00
Contact:

Re: Las Malvinas Argentinas??

Postby ikalugin » Wed 30 Mar 2016 09:00

though to be fair so can a single typhoon

Depending on the Typhoon type you can not just remove the argentinian Navy or their Airforce, but the country itself:
Image
Image
Spoiler : :
We need more missilez code for the missilez god.
Praslovan:
"Tactical Ikalugin inbound on this position in 10... 9..."
Image

Nequit
Chief Warrant Officer
Posts: 538
Joined: Thu 21 Mar 2013 00:42
Contact:

Re: Las Malvinas Argentinas??

Postby Nequit » Wed 30 Mar 2016 09:20

Not really.

Myth: Overkill would result if all the U.S. and U.S.S.R, nuclear weapons were used meaning not only that the two superpowers have more than enough weapons to kill all of each other's people, but also that they have enough weapons to exterminate the human race.

° Facts: Statements that the U.S. and the Soviet Union have the power to kill the world's population several times over are based on misleading calculations. One such calculation is to multiply the deaths produced per kiloton exploded over Hiroshima or Nagasaki by an estimate of the number of kilotons in either side's arsenal. (A kiloton explosion is one that produces the same amount of energy as does 1000 tons of TNT.) The unstated assumption is that somehow the world's population could be gathered into circular crowds, each a few miles in diameter with a population density equal to downtown Hiroshima or Nagasaki, and then a small (Hiroshima-sized) weapon would be exploded over the center of each crowd. Other misleading calculations are based on exaggerations of the dangers from long-lasting radiation and other harmful effects of a nuclear war.

User avatar
Grabbed_by_the_Spets
General
Posts: 6605
Joined: Fri 16 Mar 2012 11:40
Contact:

Re: Las Malvinas Argentinas??

Postby Grabbed_by_the_Spets » Wed 30 Mar 2016 09:55

Brits, still harping on about the Falklands like it was ever relevant!
Image

User avatar
REDDQ
General
Posts: 6906
Joined: Thu 12 Apr 2012 03:13
Location: przy stole.
Contact:

Re: Las Malvinas Argentinas??

Postby REDDQ » Wed 30 Mar 2016 10:46

Grabbed_by_the_Spets wrote:Brits, still harping on about the Falklands like it was ever relevant!


Last piece of the empire long gone. Let 'em have it.

Nequit wrote:Not really.

Myth: Overkill would result if all the U.S. and U.S.S.R, nuclear weapons were used meaning not only that the two superpowers have more than enough weapons to kill all of each other's people, but also that they have enough weapons to exterminate the human race.

° Facts: Statements that the U.S. and the Soviet Union have the power to kill the world's population several times over are based on misleading calculations. One such calculation is to multiply the deaths produced per kiloton exploded over Hiroshima or Nagasaki by an estimate of the number of kilotons in either side's arsenal. (A kiloton explosion is one that produces the same amount of energy as does 1000 tons of TNT.) The unstated assumption is that somehow the world's population could be gathered into circular crowds, each a few miles in diameter with a population density equal to downtown Hiroshima or Nagasaki, and then a small (Hiroshima-sized) weapon would be exploded over the center of each crowd. Other misleading calculations are based on exaggerations of the dangers from long-lasting radiation and other harmful effects of a nuclear war.


When and how the downplaying of nuclear weapons even started? Is it some kind of story meant to open people up to prospects of using it again? Just because nuclear weapon won't kill humanity to the last men with its blast alone doesn't mean it can't do it.

Nequit
Chief Warrant Officer
Posts: 538
Joined: Thu 21 Mar 2013 00:42
Contact:

Re: Las Malvinas Argentinas??

Postby Nequit » Wed 30 Mar 2016 10:56

It was the other way around. Capabilities of nuclear weapons were blow out of proportions by journalists and politicians.

Most people would die, but we haven't got enough warheads to kill us all.

User avatar
Kolovrat
Lieutenant
Posts: 1051
Joined: Mon 29 Apr 2013 22:03
Contact:

Re: Las Malvinas Argentinas??

Postby Kolovrat » Wed 30 Mar 2016 11:21

Nequit wrote:It was the other way around. Capabilities of nuclear weapons were blow out of proportions by journalists and politicians.

Most people would die, but we haven't got enough warheads to kill us all.


If you apply strategic warheads to enemy's economic and industrial centers, it will be enought to annihilate highly-developed industry and economy. For example, about 179 strategic warheads dropped on Moscow (as it was intended by SAC, 1956) won't completely vaporize its population, but it is enough to effectively delete its industrial capacity by zero and detroy it as a logistics center.

And what is a country without highly-developed industry and economy? Just a piece of polluted land.

Certainly, majority of population will survive somehow, even army will still struggle - you need roughly about 1 tactical nuke per 1 batallion to destroy army units. But without industry, logistics, ecomony, how long resistance may last?

That's what people mean by "destroying a country".

User avatar
REDDQ
General
Posts: 6906
Joined: Thu 12 Apr 2012 03:13
Location: przy stole.
Contact:

Re: Las Malvinas Argentinas??

Postby REDDQ » Wed 30 Mar 2016 11:25

Nequit wrote:It was the other way around. Capabilities of nuclear weapons were blow out of proportions by journalists and politicians.

Most people would die, but we haven't got enough warheads to kill us all.

Oh, there are always people left but to kill a country you do not need all warheads. I believe the same is true for civilization.

Return to “Off-Topic”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 12 guests