Article

2006-12-05 India-Pakistan

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by .com 2006-12-05 00:47|| || Front Page|| [4 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 What better platform to carry a nuke over a city?
Who watches the lifeflights over LA? Or a traffic/news copter? They scoot around as unseen as ambulances.

Posted by Skidmark 2006-12-05 01:12|| 2006-12-05 01:12|| Front Page Top

#2 Skid - It would have to be a small nuke (beyond the technical capabilities of most likely suspects) or a big helicopter - I think your standard entry-level nuke would fall right through the floor of a Bell Ranger or such.
Dirty bomb, anthrax, etc. would work, but would work at least as well in a Piper Cub, and they're a lot easier to fly. The most likely helicopter risk I can think of is a kidnapping.

Posted by Glenmore">Glenmore 2006-12-05 07:30|| 2006-12-05 07:30|| Front Page Top

#3 http://www.helicopter-games.com/roflattack.html

Posted by MacNails 2006-12-05 08:26|| 2006-12-05 08:26|| Front Page Top

#4 I think this would have to be taken to mean that the chopper pilot was forced to fly the aircraft, as you cannot just jump in one of these things and go avaiting.
And I would stongly suggest the civil aircraft community keep an extra eye out for something like this. You could really foul things up by just crashing a Piper Cub or a JetRanger into any freeway at rush hour. A light plane into the Seattle Convention Center would snarl our local economy for probably 2 weeks minimum.

Posted by USN, ret. 2006-12-05 14:11|| 2006-12-05 14:11|| Front Page Top

#5 A friend of mine was a bombardier on B-36s during his Air Force career. He said that the average weapon on a B-36 weighed 17,500 pounds, and took four men to activate. They wore lead aprons to reduce the possibility of excessive radiation exposure. These were late-model fission and early-model fusion weapons. The reason those aircraft (and later B-47 and B-52 aircraft) were so big is that nukes aren't small or light. Yeah, we miniaturized them later, but that took a ton of R&D and decades of research. Even a "suitcase nuke" weighs in the range of 30-40 pounds, and only God knows how long it can sit around and still be effective. Radioactive half-life is the enemy of nuke weapons.

It's more likely that a helicopter plot in pakiwakiland would be aimed at Perv. One helicopter, one car, big explosion, no survivors.

Posted by Old Patriot">Old Patriot 2006-12-05 14:19|| http://oldpatriot.blogspot.com/]">[http://oldpatriot.blogspot.com/] 2006-12-05 14:19|| Front Page Top

#6 But wouldn't it take out a LOT of moonbats? I mean there seems to be such a density thingy going on there... Lol.

It's things like this published in Mountlake Terrace which make me say such things, lol.

Posted by .com 2006-12-05 14:21|| 2006-12-05 14:21|| Front Page Top

23:54 gromgoru
23:47 gromgoru
23:46 gromgoru
23:44 gromgoru
23:44 newc
23:42 JosephMendiola
23:40 gromgoru
23:39 newc
23:34 newc
23:34 gromgoru
23:31 gromgoru
23:30 JosephMendiola
23:30 newc
23:17 3dc
23:13 Old Patriot
23:12 Kalle (kafir forever)
23:11 Mick Dundee
23:02 JosephMendiola
22:56 JosephMendiola
22:54 USN,Ret
22:48 twobyfour
22:46 DMFD
22:21 Zenster
22:19 Glenmore