KingIsaac's invention debate

KingIsaac wrote:

Ok. That "core thing" was just for show. It wouldn't really have an effect on the core. Only on the mantle of the Earth.

Kinetic bombardment can plow 40 kilometers into the Earth? I doubt that.

Well, ok. Let's kill the element of surprise.

What I'm planning is that when you launch the space weapon and it hit the ground, it can plow up to the mantle(or whatever) which will cause earthquake and tsunamis.

Again... futuristic, unrealistic, and ridiculous cost.

Firstly... in order for your weapon to reach up to a mantle... you need to break through... SEVERAL TENS OF MILES OF SOLID BEDROCK. You know how much power you will need?

Well, let's talk in the sense of meteor... since we are talking about orbital bombardment. It takes a meteor a size of mount Everest (YES, the size of LARGEST mountain in the world...) to create an impact that will destroy the dinosaurs. That did not reach the mantle. I would assume... that it will take double that strength to remotely THINK about reaching the mantle.

NOW, let's talk about composition. Those rocks? SOLID. DIAMOND. In fact, many of these rock's cores have diamond structure that is constructed in a way that it is STRONGER than the world's hardest man-made diamonds. It takes TWO MOUNTAIN FULL of that to reach the mantle.

You... are SO not getting that. Not in my term, and not in another SoC's term.


KI, you are asking for weapons that go WAY over the OMC-val 10. I understand your want, but I an NEVER going to approve that. Being reasonable with weapons would be very nice...

Alright, but you can't force me to remove the earthquake and tsunamis effect.

Usually... when you drop it on the ground, KI, it will make earthquake (nukes do...) and usually, when you drop it on water, it will make tsunami. Wish granted ^^

I mean extensive damages of earthquake and tsunamis.

You know... KI, as MUCH as I support your want for better weapons... you cannot have weapons that are so.... what's the right word... extreme.

We are talking about a miniature meteor. We are not talking about doomsday weapon. We are talking about a power with roughly the effectiveness of nuclear weapon, but minus the radiation, more destructive range, and less chance of interception. We are not talking about weapon that can destroy countries in a single blow.

So... just sit back and think about what you want. If you REALLY want to develop an orbital weapon that can throw statue of liberty... knock yourself out. Keep in mind that I am going to drop your credit rating so low that you won't be able to launch it into space.



... I know that I may sound hostile. And... I am sorry. It is just that... when we are discussing these weapons... you are literally going into OMC-val 11, 12, 13 and so on. We are talking about weapon that will have SIGNIFICANT damage to not only the people, but to the environment and natural order of things at large. And... I know that KI is a massive nation, but I also know that it has military bases everywhere and have been supporting various projects along WITH this one. Considering that... I have been a little agitated with your thought process. We all want the biggest guns... but... you have to understand that you cannot get a gun that doesn't exist... and even if it was capable of existing... way out of your budget range... or one that will blow up the known world and thus making none of us exist in this RP anymore.

KingIsaac wrote:

I mean extensive damages of earthquake and tsunamis.

That's not an issue of the power of the weapon, but rather the location of its detonation. A good deal of dynamite in just the right place- where tectonic pressure has built up for over a century- will trigger a highly destructive earthquake.

...
...
....
.....
......


... I am reopening this blasted thread for the third time to address the issue of KI having this innovation.

After Isis reminding me that he hates my guts for approving such a thing to KI, I decided to shoot his ideas down by saying something along the lines of...

"You were not in Tiberiam to solve it, Tiberiam needed good RP plots, and last and most importantly... KingIssac DESERVED it!!!"

But looking at this thread in which I was to find the support for my claims, I realized that KI NEVER truly answered all questions. In fact, this thread died off without solving ANYTHING. For all I know, KI might be thinking that he has an unfinished Death Star with an ability to obliteration any cities on the map.

So... I am reopening the discussion. Ras isn't here, so things might get more hectic, but I do believe that Fid is more than able to keep up valid points that Ras did before.



Here are list of grievances that KI needs to address if he wants his weapon up in space.


1. The Weapon's Magnitude

The weapon that KI wanted was something that was greater than any natural phenomenon that occurred on Earth... he wanted a weapon that can punch a whole through a mantle. That is beyond the OMC-val of 13... as in it is an world-ender. I will NEVER approve such a weapon from being developed. I NEVER APPROVED such a weapon from being developed. The weapon is way too powerful. KI stepped down and said that he just wanted earthquakes and tsunamis of ridiculous proportions... I assume enough to wipe out a good chunk of population and cause severe infrastructural damage even if the weapon missed the intended target... in which case I would also have to say no, since not even the nuclear weapons can make such a thing happen, and nukes are known to be pretty massive and powerful. Sure... the largest nuke ever built might be able to do that... if I look into it... but I doubt that Kinetic Bombardment has such a punch.

2. The Space Legacy

Again this pops up. You said before that you were going to ally with HESS to make this happen. However, now HESS does not exist, and all political relations will be reset. I would normally not care, but... if we leave this unaddressed, it means that KI is of the sudden a space power complete with ridiculously high space program. I... cannot allow that. It is one thing to keep a weapon, another thing entirely to allow standalone space program. I never approved that.

3. The MONEY

I think this is good experience for Fid, who is new. I am an economic SoC to the core, and I don't intend to change that. We still haven't fully discussed the cost and the moral cost of having a space platform of doom being protected by three meat shield shuttles. What is your say in this matter? Being the republic... I don't think that is plausible with civil rights and welfare... but... convince me otherwise.

Sorry to open old wounds, but seriously... SERIOUSLY... this is an issue that we need to cover before letting KI get away with this innovation. Any other innovations worth discussing can be shown to me via TG. And... KI, you have my personal apology. I should've cleared this out with you before I declared the legacy imports.

In order to clear up #2, Lenyo has as much as a space program as the HESS did. (Lenyo is pretty much a democratic, secular HESS. AKA somewhere I'd enjoy living.) While we do have a big space agency, all the Lenyoan funding is directed towards sciency stuff: origin of life, extraterrestrial life, what space is, better rocket boosters.

So while Lenyo would still be willing to offer its huge space program to a close ally for military purposes, it'd expect them to foot the bill for the military project. Lenyo believes space weaponry to be more trouble than it's worth, so it doesn't bother to fund any of its own.

So go on and debate #1 and 3.

Actually, the problem lies in the fact that SHOULD KI start with the Kinetic platform as legacy import that I have enacted, then KI will start with MASSIVE space program by default, since it would mean that he made the whole thing by himself, since political relations all start at zero. So... debate 2 is kinda still around.

K, well here's what I've got, since my opinion was invited...

Point 3. The Money

I did some digging on KI's military and economic stats. Before I get on topic I would just like to say that he, as well as some other people in this region have military numbers that are just flat out impossible infrastructure and maintenance-wise (for instance his army which used to have 820,000 tanks and APCs while he only has 1,520,000 men to drive and maintain them). While KI might be the worst culprit he is not the only one, I'm rather disappointed at the lack of rational and mathematical oversight in some of these numbers. And while my original military size request was equally ridiculous, when the problem was explained to me I fixed it. Anyways, that's just my side opinion on a need for oversight and regulation on military unit feasibility, especially for places like KI, who actually use their military.


Moving to the topic at hand, KI's budget. Some changes have been made since the last time you all discussed this, he now spends some 40% of his GDP on defense related spending. Bear with me now, through some hard numbers.

KI's defense budget is currently about 6 Trillion of his nations 16 Trillion GDP (remember this number). Now, KI has said he wanted 5% population in the military. He also formerly used 25.73% of THAT number to find his active duty total. With his current population that would put him now at an active force of abut 6.8 million active duty soldiers. I promise this will all be relevant just bear with me.

I had neither the time nor inclination to balance KI's budget for him but some major expenses I picked out would be: food/training costs, combat/bomber aircraft maintenance, and Naval maintenance.

Food/training using a conservative 100,000 per soldier per year (less than what US spends) because KI is capitalist and has a volunteer service I believe. This costs $683,907,100,000 a year out of budget.

He has over 200,000 combat aircraft (insert snide remark here). Costs for those for maintenance and radar/communications upkeep is about 750,000 per plane per year (more for the bombers and stealth equipped things). This costs $172,000,000,000 per year.

Accounting for his 5,847 destroyers, cruisers, submarines, and carriers he spends at least $292,350,000,000 on maintenance and upkeep.

Even with all these major programs deducted, he still has over 5 Trillion left to spend on defense budget. With overly-conservative assumptions as to upkeep costs and research/procurement programs he can still dedicate over 3 Trillion per year to this weaponized space program. If he does so he will be funding his people with what amounts to over 80 times NASA's inflation-adjusted operating budget at its height during the 60's...

Even if he only spends 1 Trillion of his 6 Trillion defense budget, He will be 29.41 times the same figure

The cost of orbital weapons is enormous, but when you spend 40% of your budget on defense, it definitely becomes feasible. Now I will say that I used his old military numbers. With his increased population and funding I'm sure KI will want a much bigger and more ridiculous military (armor/plane/ship-wise), and at that time I will need to redo the numbers, but I'm not sure he could find it within his power to make them *not* function as he wishes.


There are many ways to attack this beast, but cost is not one of them. I could draw up a brief outline (given current stats) as to how much exactly the project would cost. But given that each Tungsten "round" would cost about $3,966,000 for materials (assuming military grade tungsten wasn't more expensive), plus $9,458,000 to transport to space. AND, given that the ISS has an operating budget of a little over 2 Billion a year, the whole lifespan of the station (from early 1990s to 2017 end date) is around $157 Billion, and the fact that the Hubble Space Telescope has an operating budget of about $250 Million a year. I would definitely say it is within KI's reach.


$1.4 Billion one time cost to move 100 suitable tungsten rods to space
$3 to $3.5 Billion a year for upkeep and maintenance
$200 Billion at least for launch Costs of station
$2 Billion for ground control bunker and systems management

He has the money to do it... At least, to do what Isis has. The merits of whether or not he can build something bigger that can cause earthquakes and tsunamis is something else entirely.

I wish the numbers didn't work out that way but they do. If you like I can run them again if anyone has info that they'd like to add, but as far as I know I've taken most significant factors into account. If he used someone else's launch facilities and paid for renting their shuttles/crew to build it he could do it in 2 years easy (and even then, only 2 years because of the physical limitations of building speed).


Having just finished that whole section I've realized that you all are probably wondering if he could have afforded it *then* as opposed to now. If you'd like I can run all this again using his old force and budget totals.

Point 4. International Response

Despite everything I just said, I find this situation unacceptable from an RP standpoint. It's bad enough Isis has one (I had no say in that), but I am firmly against the weaponizing of space. Any actions taken by any nation(s) to move weapons of mass destruction into space would be met by the harshest resistance I could offer without violating my military neutrality. I can imagine there were people in the old Tiberium that felt the same. I'm sure he (and all of you) can/could do this without any one nation's support and even with some people's interference, but with everyone's interference? idk.

#4 is a good point. And Fidel brings up a point in #3 that I've been complaining about for years.

Isis Rakael and KingIsaac have two realistic choices. 1: Slash spending and remain capitalist. 2: Join the socialist bloc. I can imagine a 75% income tax rate in a Scandinavian capitalist country when you equate corporate, VAT, excise, and payroll taxes. But anything near 100%? That's the communist club.

The whole basis of NS and our RP is you can't have your cake and eat it too. Just bring spending back down to 75% and I'll stop complaining. Until then, I'm going to petition Osc to have your nations run by central committees.

I have envisioned the weapon to be more powerful than nuclear weapons. After all, why would I bother to spend trillions of money in the space weapon that almost made me become a 3rd world country if it's the same with nuclear weapons?

It should be stronger because the space weapon moves at space velocity, which according to Wikipedia, is 9 km per second. Aside from that, if you will put a "rocket" on the end point of the weapn then it will give more speed.

At its entrance on the planet, its impact becomes stronger as the earth's gravity pulls it at the rate of 3.14 per second.

Now, if the space weapon is carrying a specialized kind of chemical/weapon, something like the nuclear weapon, then it should be able to shake the earth and cause earthquakes and tsunamis. The weight of the weapon should also be taken into the equation. If I say that the weapon is 10,000 tons, then it would 10,000*3.14*9+the speed of rocket(if I'm not mistaken). That would be the force of the impact. The gravitational pull and the space velocity should be able to propel the weapon that will produce an impact that is enough to penetrate the Earth's crust by some kilometers and that sudden blow of impact on Earth should be enough to cause an earthquake. Now, the power of the weapon itself is not yet in the equation. If we add that, let's just say it has the power of 10 nuclear bombs(stronger than the atomic bombs in Nagasaki) combined, then it should be very destructive.

-----


For the Space legacy, I'd like to make it clear to all nations present that the weapon was developed through the joint project of HESS/Lenyo and KI.

-----

For the money, well it's been answered very well by Fid. And yes, I'll decrease my military numbers soon, when I have the time.

Now, the space weapon is a little more expensive than expected as there are security systems in place that will protect the space weapon from Osca's missiles.

-----

For the International Response, UKKI envisions itself as the Tiberiam's superpower that would like to meddle with everyone's affair, so a weapon is a must.

KI I'd rather not, but if need be I will also do the math for you concerning pure weapon force in Newtons comparing orbital bombardment with Nuclear explosives. But before I do something as tedious as that let me explain something to you about orbital weapons and kinetic impacts.

While hitting with massive impact force, a tungsten rod from space is not explosive. The entirety of its destructive capabilities rest on the idea of physically pummeling the target, crushing it. While any object moving that fast will cause air compression and shockwaves, it will not create an overpressure wave that explosives do. Meaning its damage to personnel, structures, and environment will not be comparable with larger nuclear bombs.


Having said that, the largest thermonuclear bomb ever detonated measured in at 5.25 on the richter scale. Your tungsten rods would hit with the earth (at terminal velocities) with a seismic force of about 11.5 tons of TNT. This equates to 3.95 on the richter scale (about the same as some of the largest thermobaric weapons ever detonated ). While several strategically placed tungsten rods could amplify the shockwave, you will never exceed about a 5.4 on the scale (to do more than that would be increasing your seismic yield by over one hundred times. I'm sorry but that is just how the math works out.

If tsunamis and earthquakes are your aim, and the weapon *HAS* to be in space, you are better off making an orbital nuke-firing station. Seriously.


The reason you would spend all this money is because once the rods are fired, there is nothing anyone can really do. Warning systems would be incredibly slow and would leave only minutes to intercept the materials. Even then "intercept" just means "move slightly to the side". The damage is near assured and instantaneous. If you are asking why you would spend so much money on something so unsatisfying then my response is: "good question. why don't you ask yourself that?"





On an unrelated note I agree with Lenyo. I'm all for these capitalisms to have super-economies, but a tax rate approaching 100%? That is capitalist economic growth with communist economic systems. It's not realistically possible, even if it is possible in-game.

Quote :

In the case of the system mentioned in the 2003 USAF report above, a 6.1m x 0.3m tungsten cylinder impacting at Mach 10 has a kinetic energy equivalent to approximately 11.5 tons of TNT (or 7.2 tons of dynamite).

The nuke dropped on Hiroshima released the equivalent of 15,000 tons of TNT. And Hiroshima's little boy was a very low quality nuke. So actually, a run-of-the-mill gives you a LOT more bang for your buck. After all, instead of just hurling a rock really fast, ICBM's are nuclear explosions.

That is true lenyo. Also, for comparison, the largest thermobaric ever detonated had the force of 50 megatons of TNT compared to 11.5 Metric tons caused by the orbital kinetic weapon.

I could see your point, Fid.

But my point is the impact from the space should be strong enough to at least penetrate into the Earth's surface and with that sudden impact it could cause an earthquake as the "fault lines" moved because of the sudden movement in the Earth's crust.

This kinetic bombardment system was supposed to be patterned after Isis' system, but since I'm trying to make this stronger I'll make some changes.

My orbital weapon shall be a nuclear missile, unlike my earlier "proposal" that my weapon is radiation-free. It is designed to kill and destroy, and it could destroy more with radiation.

So yes, it will be like orbital nuke-firing station. Why is it much stronger than the older version - it has radiation. I know the radiation effects are already common knowledge so I wouldn't bother detailing it here.

So I understand what you are implying. About an impact of that speed hitting the earth and penetrating the crust but I don't think you understand what I was talking about just now.

Those metric tons of TNT? They correspond to an impact/explosions "seismic force". Which equates to that amount of TNT detonated from within the earth's crust. It is a direct expression of energy imparted into the crust of the earth. Which is why the number has a corresponding Richter scale rating. If you want you can even measure earthquakes by tons of TNT as opposed to Richter scale number.


Now, wanting a nuke firing station is progress, but it introduces its own unique challenges. Nukes will be harder to transport, arm, launch, and store in space. Additionally, they can be shot down by normal ICBM interception techniques. Overall, it is probably inefficient to put such a station in space, as opposed to on the ground. But it is your money...

If you want to control natural disasters, why don't you just invest in a super-bomb, on the order of the largest Nuke ever detonated. And spend money building delivery systems to the ocean, where you can detonate them and cause typhoons. Unfortunately the earthquake thing is not a real practical option as far as I know.

If you're going with a space nuke, might I recommend the FOBS? The Soviets built it in the 1960s, so you'd have no problems RPing it.

Or, if you want something that reflects (pun intended) your top brass's questionable sanity, there's always the sun gun

Alright... so... we are having nukes now? An epic-class ICBM, but nukes nonetheless?

The innovation was made in the Cold war, but I STILL want this "invented" if you are interested.

Thank you SO much for clearing this out without my intervention, Fid. I wasn't around for this, so I am glad that someone else can speak the voice of reason. ^^:

Btw, KI... you are overdoing it with superweapons. Please keep it in reason. The moment you said that you were looking for a bomb that can destroy the entire Earth's crust, I have started to see this weapon of yours going VERY unrealistic. And... you know probably well as I that I would NEVER approve such weapon in the first place for the sake of Tiberiam's realism and... territories itself.


Sun Gun... indeed, that's a fine weapon if I ever knew one... maybe I'll get the means of getting it on my weapons list... hmmm...

I think FOBS is exactly the type of weapon I would like to have. Although, again, a little bit much stronger and much more protected.

Don't worry, an international treaty is coming that will ban weapons in space and low orbit. I'd love to see you have to decommission that immediately after you have it built. And yes, I have a sick sort of humor.

I wouldn't be bound by that treaty if I wouldn't sign it. A nation will only be bound by an international treaty/law if the nation is a member of an organization or if it is one of the signatories in the treaty.

Being a nation in the Tiberiam world doesn't automatically make me a member of the Tiberiam's Assembly(or whatever you call it)

You're right and wrong at the time. On one hand, obviously there's no need for you to comply with the treaty if you don't choose to sign the treaty. However, if there is a coalition of everyone except for you, then it's in your best interest to sign it anyway. Because in the end, you'll be fought tooth and nail as you build it. Of course, if you don't try building a weapon in low orbit (or in space), there will be no reason for met to try to ban it internationally. Therefore, there's no reason for you to be the biggest boy on the block. If you still think you can get away with it, well, that's where the real fun begins.

EDIT: Yeah, I think everything is pretty much settled here. Pretty much everything I said will be dealt with in the IC.