RSS Icon
categories: Geeky

Will you and your city survive a nuclear holocaust? Probably not.

9 Littlegrey Comments:

February 27th, 2012 at 3:15 am Mick says:

Well... goes to show that I probably live outside the danger zone considering where I live isn't near anything that's a particularly viable target. I mean I live in a city, but it's one of those small cities that wouldn't be an impressive target. If someone nuked it everyone'd go 'really? THAT city?'

Which is to say, if they dropped that Tsar Bomba on the actual -capital- of my country, I'd personally not burn in the atomic fires. Or apperrently even live in an irradiated area after.

I guess that's at least ONE death risk chalked up as 'rather unlikely'.

Of course if anyone DOES detonate a nuke near any western capital city, it's safe to assume nukes would start flying left and right and I'd possibly burn anyway... Or freeze due to nuclear winter. Or get killed by other survivors probably. Albeit hopefully taking a few down with me at least. That or I'd starve... or maybe mutate into a pile of cancer.

Unless of course it's the terrorists whom detonate a nuke, then I'll be safe but the middle east will likely turn into glass shortly after. Which is probably why terrorists may want to stick to lesser atrocities.

Also goes to show that lobbing a magneticly accelerated iron-rich meteor at something ought to make nukes look like cherrybombs if you can get it to go fast enough. Maybe that'll be how humanity'll finally hoist itself by it's own petard. It'd get quite a bit more punch then even that Tsar Bomba. Speed being mass and all and dense metal objects being what they are to begin with.

I guess the Tsar seemed both terrifying (in what it actually did destroy) yet somehow unimpressive (in the scale of that area on the size of the earth) I guess I actually thought nukes would have larger area's affected.

8 Avatar
February 25th, 2012 at 8:01 pm RJ says:

HB - As I understand it, Soviet-era nukes were made larger to compensate for the relatively greater impurities in the warhead material.

US nukes generally burn hotter and cleaner when they detonate, while Soviet nukes would have simply blown-up enough to scatter radioactive dust for miles. Either way, you're just as dead.

7 Avatar
February 25th, 2012 at 5:35 pm Wheelnut says:

If people were to detonate the tiniest one, I think I'd be just fine! Depending on where they detonate it, that is...

6 Avatar
February 24th, 2012 at 3:56 am thepara says:

The last 3 places I've lived have been major targets here in Canada. The biggest based in Canada, then the city that hosts the counterpart to the underground launch bunker in Colorado and finally where Canada's Air Command HQ is located.

Pretty much been screwed (in the case of a nuclear war) all my life. LOL

This was neat to mess with though.

5 Avatar
February 23rd, 2012 at 9:16 pm J. Woher says:

*Ba dum tss* ;).

4 Avatar
February 23rd, 2012 at 8:08 pm zombie from hell says:

Maybe they just got it wrong and did it the opposite way. Went home and went big. :P

3 Avatar
February 23rd, 2012 at 7:31 pm nika says:

I'm surprised they're still referred to as soviet bombs. :P

2 Avatar
February 23rd, 2012 at 7:20 pm HB Feermaster says:

I'm surprised the big soviet bombs are so much bigger than the largest US ones. I thought 'go big or go home' was an American thing.

1 Avatar
February 23rd, 2012 at 7:02 pm J. Woher says:

Yep, lauch a tsar bomb in my home town and you can wave goodbye to the whole country. D:

Leave a Comment:
Please read our Rules on Commenting. Comments that break the rules are subject to removal.
Did you know that you can use your Dig Your Own Grave account to chat in The Forums?

WARNING: unregistered user's comments may be held for moderation before being posted. Registered user's comments do not require moderation.