130 points

Because they could use a trampoline to fling them back and we’d end up the the biggest game of tennis

permalink
report
reply
14 points

I’d watch that.

permalink
report
parent
reply
41 points

They said why not, they didn’t ask for you to give extra reasons why we should

permalink
report
parent
reply
17 points

That’s why we have to start flinging them now. Before the Zs close the trampoline gap. Sure they’d fling a few warships back now. I’m not saying we wouldn’t get our hair mussed, but it would be minimal casualties. 30 or 40 million tops. Depending on the breaks.

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points

Have you ever seen a commie drink a glass of water?

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

No, general, I don’t believe I have.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

I’m confused, what’s the reason we aren’t doing this yet?

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Physics, and money.

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

We don’t have enough NCD on the Senate committee on defense appropriations yet.

permalink
report
parent
reply
20 points

And most important of all - and most tragically ironic - our Nation could have afforded, and can afford now, the steps necessary to close the trampoline gap. But our task now is not to fix the blame for the past, but to fix a course for the future.

-JFK

permalink
report
parent
reply
93 points
*

Damn, that’s a high quality simulation. Those tasteful fractures, wonderful.

permalink
report
reply
42 points

Is it? I feel like the ship would basically pancake in on itself at first impact.

permalink
report
parent
reply
29 points

Dunno, I haven’t catapulted a warship recently but it feels right?

permalink
report
parent
reply
15 points

I haven’t catapulted a warship recently

Slacker.

permalink
report
parent
reply
57 points

Yea the first impact is not pancakey enough. And the second impact is too stone crumbly.

Also the chain is uncanny.

But this is still amazing and way better than anything I could do in 100 lifetimes.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

They likely took some liberties to have the back half crush the second building. That chain really does stand out though

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

I can’t wait for my parents to ask me if this facebook “attack footage” is real

permalink
report
parent
reply
36 points

I wonder how much energy it would require to fling a warship from, say, NATO lake to Moscow.

permalink
report
reply
21 points

at least 3

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

Not great, not terrible.

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points

Probably depends entirely on the aerodynamics involved, if we’re assuming it’s approaching as an aircraft. This is kind of an intermediate range, and it has shitty ballistics, so the energy to just get it off the ground will be dwarfed.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

I would say a rock is a better approximation than an aircraft lmao

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points
*

If you throw it, and it doesn’t go into space, a rock is an aircraft.

Source: Am an airforce geologist. /s

permalink
report
parent
reply
10 points

This is NCD, ignoring air resistance or at very minimum using wildly incorrect values is expected

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

Shit. So I should have gone with the “oversized hyperloop” idea and just said zero. My bad.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

Remember your college physics: First Rule - we can ignore aerodynamics.

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points
*

For these purposes I am, of course, assuming that air resistance doesn’t exist. Which would probably increase this answer by a lot.

Narva bay to Moscow = 713 km Fully loaded Arleigh Burke destroyer displacement = 8,432,800 kg

v = launch velocity d = horizontal distance = 713000 m θ = angle we’re launching the ship at = 45 degrees g = acceleration (from gravity) = 9.81 ms^-1

Range of a projectile equation:

d = (v^2 sin(2θ)) / g

Rearrange to find v:

dg = v^2 sin(2θ) dg / sin(2θ) = v^2 v = (dg / sin(2θ))^0.5

Plug our numbers in:

v = (713000*9.81 / sin(2*45))^0.5 v = (6994530 / 1)^0.5 v = 2644.72 ms^-1

So we need to launch at 2,645 metres per second (9,522 kph, 5,917 mph). To get the energy, we use the kinetic energy equation:

e = 0.5 m v^2 e = 0.5*8432800*2644.72^2 e = 29,491,794,808,885.76 joules e = 29.5 terajoules

For comparison, the nuclear bomb dropped on Hiroshima exploded with about 60 terajoules of energy. So once you account for air resistance you’re probably looking at a nuke of energy.

permalink
report
parent
reply
10 points

Honestly that sounds pretty good actually. We get to nuke something AND we get to throw a fucking ship to Moscow

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points

So let’s you want to yeet this over 1000km from a NATO country to Moscow.

You’d need at least 3000 m/s of velocity to do this (a ton more since this without air resistance).

A fletcher class destroyer is around 2000 tons.

So you’d need more than 8 terajoules or 2 kilotons of TNT.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

You’d need at least 3000 m/s of velocity to do this (a ton more since this without air resistance).

Sounds pretty doable with enough boosters and struts. Pretty sure I’ve flung worse in KSP

permalink
report
parent
reply
35 points
*

Oh I’m going to do the math on this:

assuming the warship is being fired from a naval gun of truly massive proportions based on the AGS Mark 5, firing a saboted warship based on the LRLAP ( since they were made for the Zumwalt class and cost a million a round, making them the obvious best choice.)

And why not, let’s also make the warship a Zumwaltz class, for flavor synergy.

The LRLAP weighd 225lbs and had an effective range of 150km, so thats ~ 100kg at 150km, and it would travel at 825 mps, let’s say ours needs to go 800, were in no rush.

Projectile Mass: A Zumwalt weighs, rounded down, 15,000 long tons, which is 15,240,704 kg Let’s say 15,000,000 kilograms. They emptied it, unloaded the ammunition, decommissioned the AGS, so it weighs a little less. Zumwalts are 610 feet long, let’s make that 1000 total to account for an aerodynamic sabot and charge, so 300m. The bore length was 378" and the shell 88", so that gives us a ratio of 4.29:1

Our barrel is 1287m long, let’s just say 1200m.

Saboted Zumwalt: 15,000,000Kg

Barrel length of gun: 1200m

Distance: We’re gonna park this gun on Gotland, middle of lake NATO. Well need some space, and that’s right in the middle. It’s 1,168.31 km as the crow flies, so we’ll round up to 1200 km.

So, our 1.2Km long nuclear cannon would send our saboted 15,000,000 ton Zumwalt 1200km @ 800 mps, requiring 1200 Kilotons of energy, rounded up. The boat would be in flight for about 25 minutes.

My math is quite accurate, please do not double check it.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

Nuclear trebuchet

permalink
report
parent
reply
56 points

Are we stupid?

Yes

permalink
report
reply
25 points

Are we crazy?

permalink
report
parent
reply
22 points

Also yes

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

I’m pretty sure crazy is less predictable that stupid, fwiw.

permalink
report
parent
reply
74 points

Ze French had ze right idéa!

permalink
report
reply
24 points

RUN AWAY!

permalink
report
parent
reply

NonCredibleDefense

!noncredibledefense@sh.itjust.works

Create post

A community for your defence shitposting needs

Rules

1. Be nice

Do not make personal attacks against each other, call for violence against anyone, or intentionally antagonize people in the comment sections.

2. Explain incorrect defense articles and takes

If you want to post a non-credible take, it must be from a “credible” source (news article, politician, or military leader) and must have a comment laying out exactly why it’s non-credible. Low-hanging fruit such as random Twitter and YouTube comments belong in the Matrix chat.

3. Content must be relevant

Posts must be about military hardware or international security/defense. This is not the page to fawn over Youtube personalities, simp over political leaders, or discuss other areas of international policy.

4. No racism / hatespeech

No slurs. No advocating for the killing of people or insulting them based on physical, religious, or ideological traits.

5. No politics

We don’t care if you’re Republican, Democrat, Socialist, Stalinist, Baathist, or some other hot mess. Leave it at the door. This applies to comments as well.

6. No seriousposting

We don’t want your uncut war footage, fundraisers, credible news articles, or other such things. The world is already serious enough as it is.

7. No classified material

Classified ‘western’ information is off limits regardless of how “open source” and “easy to find” it is.

8. Source artwork

If you use somebody’s art in your post or as your post, the OP must provide a direct link to the art’s source in the comment section, or a good reason why this was not possible (such as the artist deleting their account). The source should be a place that the artist themselves uploaded the art. A booru is not a source. A watermark is not a source.

9. No low-effort posts

No egregiously low effort posts. E.g. screenshots, recent reposts, simple reaction & template memes, and images with the punchline in the title. Put these in weekly Matrix chat instead.

10. Don't get us banned

No brigading or harassing other communities. Do not post memes with a “haha people that I hate died… haha” punchline or violating the sh.itjust.works rules (below). This includes content illegal in Canada.

11. No misinformation

NCD exists to make fun of misinformation, not to spread it. Make outlandish claims, but if your take doesn’t show signs of satire or exaggeration it will be removed. Misleading content may result in a ban. Regardless of source, don’t post obvious propaganda or fake news. Double-check facts and don’t be an idiot.


Join our Matrix chatroom


Other communities you may be interested in


Banner made by u/Fertility18

Community stats

  • 5.2K

    Monthly active users

  • 1.4K

    Posts

  • 14K

    Comments