The GM's Hall

[Kevin Kingswell]

Yes, I'd have absolutely no problem with these things being used by anybody. My problem is with android soldiers that are not available with 2014 technology. Of course, as long as they remain optional I'm satisfied, lol.

 

My apologies then. I was confused and didn't realise we were talking about androids. Also for the record for everyone taking part my vampires are indeed optional canon ;) Sexy as they may be.

[Mogar]

I have a question regarding the legitimacy of Voodoo/Triyun moving into the Cocos Islands, as shammy was not wiped at that point, since Brandenburg and other similar situations were called into question, I feel it is fair to bring this up for discussion as well.

[Centurius]

When someone has moved beyond 21 days inactive shouldn't they just be automatically wiped?

[Voodoo Nova]

I'm not moving to the Cocos and Shammy is at 39 days anyways. Vektor started a week earlier and you didn't complain then. You joined in the RP.

[Mogar]

Coco Islands != Cocos Islands, and was white space since Mona's India. I am simply questioning moving into the land before we got a reply from the guy.

[Hereno]

When someone has moved beyond 21 days inactive shouldn't they just be automatically wiped?

I think this is what we agreed on, but in practice, we don't always know exactly when it's been 21 days. I'm not even sure who's job it is to be checking for inactives. I agree that we need to make sure everybody is still around, though. There are a few places I think might actually be white space. Edited July 29, 2014 by Hereno

[Voodoo Nova]

Coco Islands != Cocos Islands, and was white space since Mona's India. I am simply questioning moving into the land before we got a reply from the guy.

 

Shammy hasn't made a post since June 19. It's even passed the 30 day mark that was proposed some time ago.

 

Edit: Burma should change their islands names.

Edited July 29, 2014 by Voodoo Nova

[Hereno]

Would I be allowed to use cobalt in my nuclear warheads?

Cobalt-59 is turned into the radioactive cobalt-60, which has a half life of about five years. In effect, it would have the same range as a normal nuke. It would also do 50% less damage than a normal nuke. However, it remains highly radioactive for a lot longer. Even with the best cleanup, it'd take like two or more years to make it inhabitable again. And of course, they'd be subject to all the normal nuke limits.

The technology is actually very old. But it just wasn't seen as useful:

No cobalt or other salted bomb has ever been atmospherically tested, and as far as is publicly known none have ever been built. In light of the ready availability of fission-fusion-fission bombs, it is unlikely any special-purpose fallout contamination weapon will ever be developed.

The British did test a bomb that incorporated cobalt as an experimental radiochemical tracer (Antler/Round 1, 14 September 1957). This 1 kt device was exploded at the Tadje site, Maralinga range, Australia. The experiment was regarded as a failure and not repeated.

They were testing them in the 50's. But they figured uranium was superior, so why even bother making them? But it's all extremely possible even with circa 1950's technology... much less 2000+. Given the drawbacks, I feel it's more than fair to allow them to be used, but I wanted to bring it to your attention before actually RPing it and then it being a problem.

Read more about the tech here: http://nuclearweaponarchive.org/Nwfaq/Nfaq1.html#nfaq1.6

[Triyun]

Would I be allowed to use cobalt in my nuclear warheads?

Cobalt-59 is turned into the radioactive cobalt-60, which has a half life of about five years. In effect, it would have the same range as a normal nuke. It would also do 50% less damage than a normal nuke. However, it remains highly radioactive for a lot longer. Even with the best cleanup, it'd take like two or more years to make it inhabitable again. And of course, they'd be subject to all the normal nuke limits.

The technology is actually very old. But it just wasn't seen as useful:


They were testing them in the 50's. But they figured uranium was superior, so why even bother making them? But it's all extremely possible even with circa 1950's technology... much less 2000+. Given the drawbacks, I feel it's more than fair to allow them to be used, but I wanted to bring it to your attention before actually RPing it and then it being a problem.

Read more about the tech here: http://nuclearweaponarchive.org/Nwfaq/Nfaq1.html#nfaq1.6

 

Doesn't this also violate the custom rule stuff?

 

Beyond that though.

 

I do not see how this would be technically possible on modern nuclear warheads which have been significantly miniaturized since the 1950s:

 

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/78/Nuclear_weapon_size_chart.jpg

 

A modern thermonuclear device works by having a fission explosion compressing the fusion material to create a fusion explosion, amounts of volume and weight that can be used to achieve this on a modern missile is very specific, but especially on missiles where throw weight and size is a significant factor.  While cobalt devices have been built, no weapon has, and it is much harder if you want to have the same range on a nuke as you asked to build a warhead that can fit on a missile, than one of the big lumbering bombs of the 1950s.  

[Hereno]

Well yeah, but with more stuff means a larger radius. Since my radius is the same, we can assume that a smaller amount of material is being used; enough to not be too heavy. I'd be willing to limit my range to, say, 7,000km, but that missiles aren't in use for them is a direct result of them not being pursued further... it has nothing to do with the physics of it beyond that.

[Triyun]

Missiles don't work that way, especially ballistic, most ballistic missiles with X amount of range can only do that (within the tailored confines of its terminal stage arc (Very narrow) its very precision ballistic engineering.  Warheads are engineered for missiles and vice versa on the big stuff, adding more weight is a very dangerous thing.  Beyond that again its experimental.  How could it be that an F-35 with hundreds of test flights cannot be fielded, but this warhead with the only one test being conducted and considered a failure at 1 kiloton, be incorporated onto a micronized nuclear warhead design which had not been invented when it was tested and is many times smaller and very specific allowed?  That doesn't seem fair or make too much sense. 

 

The one type of missile with variable range is the cruise missile.  The cruise missile which actually flies rather than shootup like an artillery shell.  But the cruise missile holds an even smaller warhead, which would make the technology to equip onto it even way smaller.

 

From what the description says its not possible to make a weapon that's smaller than the smallest nuclear warhead or even equivalent size because the cobalt needs to be jacketed around the fusion material.  As I'm sure most who know a little bit about nukes know, you still have to have the fission explosion first which means you still need the uranium in order to compress the fusion material to create the energy to start the nuclear fusion.  The results mean that you would be definition need to have a much physically larger as well as weigh a lot more warhead.  http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/1f/W-88_warhead_detail.png

 

What you're talking about is simply far too experimental and in the little I know of nuclear weaponry, very unlikely to be possible.  Especially on missiles, building a very big low and slow gravity device to drop out of the back of a plane is of course different, but this is again experimental having never moved beyond a 1 kiloton device, which according to the experimental ruling on everything else like drones, planes, and ships, shouldn't be allowed.

 

Edit:  It appears the technology has never been tested with a fusion system anyways.  The British test the only experiment (or building of he device was solely a plutonium fission weapon, it was also dropped from a tower so its never been weaponized in any form much less demonstrated for missiles:  http://nuclearweaponarchive.org/Uk/UKTesting.html  (control F operation antler.)

Edited July 30, 2014 by Triyun

[Hereno]

Thank you, 4th GM, for your quick and detailed responses which surely have nothing to do with the invasion you're planning. I'm sure the GMs will be happy to see a pro and con argument made.

[Beauty]

Rudolph can I appeal my perma-ban from #CNRP2 ever or is it staying perma?

[Mogar]

I'd say its experimental to strap a different engine onto an aircraft like you have done Triyun, but it appears that it is acceptable for you to do, why is it not acceptable for others to tweak their weaponry accordingly?

[Triyun]

I'd say its experimental to strap a different engine onto an aircraft like you have done Triyun, but it appears that it is acceptable for you to do, why is it not acceptable for others to tweak their weaponry accordingly?

 

Existing engine onto an existing air frame it was designed for.  The Next Generation Fighter engine contract was supposed to work with either the F-23 or F-22 air frame.  The F-119 engine I use is linked as the engine for the YF-23 on wikipedia.  The tech all exists, every part in that aircraft is in service today. I went out of my way with the GMs to make sure what I was doing was fine.  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northrop_YF-23  It can be found in the stats right there.

 

By contrast to a warhead for a cobalt missile, none have ever been built.  Let alone one that can be shrunk down and survive the rigors of an missile.  There exists no weaponized cobalt device at all let alone one miniaturized for combat use.  The only experimental test of of a 1 kiloton device was done and that proved a failure, and it was done prior to modern nuclear devices being ever invented.  That's apples and oranges.  

[Hereno]

When did I ever say I wanted it to be used as a tactical nuclear weapon? Stop making shit up to argue about in the GM thread, god damn.

Edited July 30, 2014 by Hereno

[Centurius]

When did I ever say I wanted it to be used as a tactical nuclear weapon? Stop making !@#$ up to argue about in the GM thread, god damn.

Because just looking at the mere physics of the operation that's basically the best you're going to get out of it. It is impossible to make it a strategic weapon and highly improbable for a tactical one.

[jesbro]

If we are still talking about inactive players I have noticed that the user for Macau has not done anything in the rp since his/her DOE. Dont want to just take that territory if he does plan on using it but so far I am not sure if he/she ever will.

[Maelstrom Vortex]

21 day rule Jesbro. If he has not served appropriate notice, you may act on the fall of his government. However, as a courtesy, you should try to send him an IG PM and just see if he still has any interest in playing.

[Dillon1102]

Okay GM's, I love Nutmeg and stuff, but his last post was July 09th which makes his 21st day of inactivity yesterday . Which makes my claim very much valid. :wacko:

[Lynneth]

Declaring a protectorate is quite different from moving into a region to annex it. Nothing of value was lost from your IC perspective, imo.

Then again I'm involved, so my opinion doesn't count. :v:

[Hereno]

Yo Ty, when will I be getting a response to the Baleares situation?

Gonna go ahead and request an auto-advance on this. It's been several days now and I have naval assets locked waiting on a response from him.

[Evangeline Anovilis]

http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?/topic/121679-cnrp2-ooc-thread/?p=3290628

 

Following this discussion, I would like to contest Iowas on 2014 tech. This ship has never been modernised this way, Zoot has not even a concept he can present that backs up feasability. I would like to think that this RP wants to keep its military to what actually exists, so we should not have to put up with vague concepts like this.

[Zoot Zoot]

I will respond here once and only once.

 

An Iowa Class battleship exists right now, today, you can go and see it, touch it, crap in its latrines, and vomit over the side of the thing. Before it was retired, it had been retrofitted in 1980 and kept up to date, undergoing maintainence and upgrades and by 1991, it was simply a battleship, with cruise missiles, harpoons, missile counter measures, modern sensors and radar and computer systems to name a few.

 

The ship remained the same with the above additions.

 

Applying 2014 equivilant and available technologies to replace the 1991 systems is not impossible, and i fail to see why this is a problem. I am not putting on 16inch railguns, hypersonic cruise missiles, nanotech armour or any other wizardry. A 2014 Iowa is feasible on every single level that exists because it was done before from the 1945 original, to the 1980 platform and the 1990/1991 platform. The legwork has already been done for the most part.

 

The short of it is this, a 2014 Iowa class battleship has the following advantages:

*It can network with other warships in the battlegroup

*Better sensors/radar for more accurate tracking of air and sea targets

*More accurate fire control systems for the 16inch cannons based on stronger, more accurate sensors, and data linking

*Better defence countermeasures such as CIWS or laser based defences such as MTHEL on a limited basis due to power usage and power source.

*Potentially nuclear powered rather than fossile fuelled

 

It has no more offensive capabilities than it did before apart from that its weapons are more accurate, and its defences are slightly better due to increased sensor ability and data networking with the rest of the battlegroup.

 

I will bow down to a GM decision of course, but I have made my case in two threads now including this one.

[Hereno]

As the person Zoot is currently attacking, I have to admit that I don't really give a shit one way or another about tech, because I'm probably not gonna win or lose the war based on one random ship's tech being upgraded past 1991 levels. I'd be willing to just RP as if it were that way while you guys make your decision, just so we don't have to keep adding things to drag this war out longer than it already is... I still need to do what Zoot just did for Triyun, and TBH I'm not even started on it.