Is your nuclear bunker ready?

[menthe]

I hear from the news that the UK are going to test everybody's mobile phone with a signal on a Sunday (didn't take any notice of which one) at 15.00 hours.

Is that just so that they have a means of telling people should Putin unleash a nuclear missile?

And please, don't tell me to just stick to French topics.  In the event of a nuclear event, ALL of us are going to be affected.

Thoughts and comments please.  Even if you plan to frighten the daylights out of me....might take me a while to lead-line the sous-sol.

[anotherbanana]

Ah yes, Tom Lehrer said it all:

 

[Loiseau]

23 April, menthe.
And I gather the time of 15h was eventually selected to avoid clashing with the  London Marathon or the FA Cup semi-final.
I hope Putin will be as considerate.

What time would he have to avoid for the French? Sunday mornings, and any lunch time I suppose. 😄

 

That Tom Lehrer…. His rhymes put one in mind of WS Gilbert.

[menthe]

I did so enjoy your clip, Wools.  And it is strangely comforting😂

After all, "an incandescent glow" sounds like bonfire night intensified thousands of times doesn't it?

[Harnser]

7 hours ago, menthe said:

I hear from the news that the UK are going to test everybody's mobile phone with a signal on a Sunday (didn't take any notice of which one) at 15.00 hours.

Is that just so that they have a means of telling people should Putin unleash a nuclear missile?

And please, don't tell me to just stick to French topics.  In the event of a nuclear event, ALL of us are going to be affected.

Thoughts and comments please.  Even if you plan to frighten the daylights out of me....might take me a while to lead-line the sous-sol.

I presume you know that France introduced a similar system last year?

https://www.interieur.gouv.fr/actualites/dossiers-de-presse/alerter-et-proteger-deploiement-national-du-dispositif-fr-alert-0

 

[Lehaut]

When I was at school there was a cinema club.  For some reason or other we got to watch "The War Game" a film by Peter Watkins.  The BBC commissioned it, but then refused to show it as it was too realistic.  That and "Threads" are sobering things to watch and remove any thought of controllable nuclear exchanges.  Identifying bodies solely by the bucket of wedding rings haunts me to this day.

The parking for our block is down on -2, under quite a few meters of concrete and earth.  It has running water and concrete stair access.  Some of the garages are 60sq meters, so I will be appropriating one of those if necessary.

[menthe]

Lehaut, do you think it is worth surviving?  Wouldn't you simply surface from your parking block and see nothing but grey ash and bed dodies everywhere?

I read recently that, after the historic volcano eruption at Pompeii, people's organs were turned to glass by the heat.  Do you think a nuclear eruption would be hotter than a volcanic one?  Yes, it's academic but I can only take all this stuff lightly because I don't know how else to approach this subject.

[Lehaut]

21 hours ago, menthe said:

Lehaut, do you think it is worth surviving?  Wouldn't you simply surface from your parking block and see nothing but grey ash and bed dodies everywhere?

There is a theory that in a nuclear exchange of cities you would not start with Paris or London.  Rather you would target smaller cities, Birmingham or Nantes, so you could ramp up the carnage if the other power did not back down.  So hopefully I would indeed be turned to ash in the first exchange and not have the lingering death of radiation poisoning or starvation.

I have played a lot of computer games based on the survivor experience (Fall Out, all the Stalkers etc).  Whilst there is a certain romantic/heroic pleasure in overcoming the perceived difficulties, the reality would be far different.   

In my I career played an active part in manning and operating the UKs nuclear deterrent.  In one exercise all my protective equipment became so contaminated in a controlled environment that I had to be stripped of it and cleaned down.  Radiation is not to be underestimated.  And yes, near a nuclear blast, sand is turned to glass, human flesh evaporates.  They are the lucky ones.

[menthe]

So I was right to refuse to worry?  Thank you Lehaut.

Well, at the first blast of the signal, I shall rush outside and disintegrate toute suite.

[Harnser]

All this nuclear armageddon discussion hinges on the answer to the question:-

"Will russia's nuclear weapons actually work?" 

Explanation

Nuclear weapons need regular servicing due to the initialising and boosting component tritium gas decaying into helium 3.

It's not like conventional bullets or shells which still work properly after 50 to 100 years

Trtium is a neutron emitter when used as an initialiser and fission booster to the bomb core,  but it's half life is about 12.5 years.

Its decay product is Helium-3, which absorbs neutrons, so it’s critical to refresh the boosting gas periodically or the warhead goes psst instead of boom - it's called a fizzle.

Here's the interesting bit. Tritium costs around $30,000 per gram, the world market for tritium is only about 400 grams so it's value is on a par with the finest diamond.

In the time gap between the collapse of the Soviet Union and the rise of the current Russia a lot of top people got obscenely rich due to selling off any assets they could get hold of.

Given that during the start of the invasion of Ukraine the Russian armoured personnel carriers were breaking down in their droves because of being fitted with new cheap knock-off Chinese tyres.

Ask yourself the question

"Did Russia carry on faithfully maintaining all those nuclear warheads with expensive tritium or did the oligarchs sell it off?"

 

 

[ssomon]

I've also been wondering if the ageing, ex-Soviet, Russian nuclear weapons would actually work.

Not only because of lack of maintenance of the weapons themselves, but of their infrastructure.

Things like regularly maintaining, lubricating and inspecting heavy moving parts, and testing they actually work in simulated operation. Mundane stuff which tends to be ignored because of laziness or simply lack of personnel, skills, and spares.

Apparently many Russian tanks and other machinery broke down in Ukraine, which may be a good indicator. Tank tracks wear down quite rapidly when used on hard surfaces, so repeated ceremonial parades, while perhaps impressive, can be costly in maintenance, if it is even done properly, and spare parts are available.

On a similar note, in another part of the world, in a country where this wouldn't be expected, I know of at least one big ship which went aground on a rocky coast due to lack of maintenance. The engines couldn't be restarted after an electrical failure, because those in charge didn't follow the correct procedure, and neither anchor could be dropped because they had been dogged down, and everything was so rusted they couldn't be released in time. (Bl**dy BIG anchors)

A colleague who had been in a large navy told me that those in charge had decided that the engine scheduled maintenance programme was a load of nonsense, so the work was recorded as carried out and all the highly expensive spares which should have been used were thrown over the side to keep the records in balance.

Edited April 16, 2023 by ssomon
corrections

[Lehaut]

Valid points.  I have read that the Russian defence doctrine was based on the nuclear "big stick" threat and their conventional weapons would not be needed as the nuclear deterrent would be sufficient. Judging by what we have seen so far, their nuclear weapons could well be in a similar state to Admiral Kuznetsov!

Also, NATO/Europe is running out of conventional bullets etc as their doctrine is based on air superiority and it was thought that large stockpiles of shells would not be needed.

 

[menthe]

Hm, so the policy on both sides seems to be let's enjoy the sunshine while we can and let the rainy day can take care of itself?

 

 

 

[Harnser]

1 hour ago, menthe said:

Hm, so the policy on both sides seems to be let's enjoy the sunshine while we can and let the rainy day can take care of itself?

Not really, on Nato's side it's more about calculating Putin's threat level and intensive pressure on China to dissuade Putin from using either nuclear or chemical/biological weapons.

I would guess that part of the long conversation between Biden and Xi was Biden leaning on Xi to warn the Russians, “We will not be with you if you do this.” Russia would be totally isolated in the world if it used any of these weapons against civilians etc.

If Putin was 100% serious about his nuclear threat I would have expected him by now to have arranged a little demonstration of a low yield tactical weapon somewhere that it would do little harm - say in the high |Russian arctic with prior warning to NATO and the USA to avoid any retaliation by itchy trigger fingers.

But perhaps he wouldn't want to do that in case it goes Psst instead of Boom.................!!!

 

 

 

[ssomon]

18 minutes ago, Harnser said:

But perhaps he wouldn't want to do that in case it goes Psst instead of Boom.................!!!

Maybe he doesn't know that's possible.

Maybe there is no-one who isn't afraid to tell him...................

Edited April 17, 2023 by ssomon
quote did't work until I pasted it in