Return to Unfiction unforum
 a.r.g.b.b 
FAQ FAQ   Search Search 
 
Welcome!
New users, PLEASE read these forum guidelines. New posters, SEARCH before posting and read these rules before posting your killer new campaign. New players may also wish to peruse the ARG Player Tutorial.

All users must abide by the Terms of Service.
Website Restoration Project
This archiving project is a collaboration between Unfiction and Sean Stacey (SpaceBass), Brian Enigma (BrianEnigma), and Laura E. Hall (lehall) with
the Center for Immersive Arts.
Announcements
This is a static snapshot of the
Unfiction forums, as of
July 23, 2017.
This site is intended as an archive to chronicle the history of Alternate Reality Games.
 
The time now is Sat Nov 23, 2024 1:24 am
All times are UTC - 4 (DST in action)
View posts in this forum since last visit
View unanswered posts in this forum
Calendar
 Forum index » Archive » Archive: Cloverfield (1-18-08) » Cloverfield: General / Updates
[QUESTION] SPOILERWas it a nuke or some kind of bombardment?
View previous topicView next topic
Page 8 of 9 [126 Posts]   Goto page: Previous 1, 2, 3, ..., 6, 7, 8, 9 Next
Author Message
Roe
Boot

Joined: 20 Jan 2008
Posts: 58

Yeah, the army guy calls Hammerdown a protocal in the movie when he tells Rob about it--I went to see it again.

The Army guy says something along the lines of they are willing to let Manhattan go, and institute the Hammerdown protocal if whatever they are doing at that time doesn't work. Then in response to something Rob says, the guy says they would level all of Manhattan.

I have no clue if it was a nuke or not, but obviously the director wanted us to think it was something really bad for Rob and Beth. On the open mic they say God Help US all, after its said Hammerdown was being put into action.

Artistic license, I guess. I don't know. I get to into this stuff too much at times. It's more fun than the actual movie is. Shocked

PostPosted: Tue Jan 22, 2008 5:25 pm
 View user's profile
 Back to top 
tsua hx
Greenhorn


Joined: 22 Jan 2008
Posts: 6

Zaggs wrote:


Unless of course you ignore the fact low altitude detonations can at least produce Source Region EMP pulses, or SREMP.

http://www.fas.org/irp/threat/mctl98-2/p2sec06.pdf



I didnt ignore SREMPs so much as avoid them for the sake of argument. However, I think the argument for SREMPs isnt valid as air-burst detonations are generally high(ish) yeild, and used (hypothetically) for more land-leveling purposes. A nuke detonated at 5km (3.1) miles above the earth isnt eactly the best for a "kill that giant fricken monster" situation. At least one that involves alot of potential collateral damage.

PostPosted: Tue Jan 22, 2008 5:26 pm
 View user's profile
 Back to top 
skizzott
Greenhorn

Joined: 22 Jan 2008
Posts: 3

One point I brought up on another board (I apoligize if it's been brought up here, haven't read the whole thread), is that if it were a nuke, wouldn't there only need to be one? If I recall, there were multiple bombs at the end. You hear bombs and see rubble, hear Rob/Beth, more bombs, then black.

My personal thought is that there would be way too much fallout for them to use any nuclear weapons and that "Hammerdown" was just a protocol to level the city using whatever non nuclear method they could. Whatever they did, it obviously didn't work:)

PostPosted: Tue Jan 22, 2008 5:29 pm
 View user's profile
 Back to top 
rose
...and then Magic happens


Joined: 26 Nov 2003
Posts: 4117

My favorite reason to they didn't use nukes:

We all know that radiation creates monsters. Why make more of them? Wink
_________________
I love this site for being free, in every sense of the word~Spacebass

Mankind was my business, the common good was my business.~ Dickens


PostPosted: Tue Jan 22, 2008 5:31 pm
 View user's profile Visit poster's website
 Back to top 
Zaggs
Boot

Joined: 21 Jan 2008
Posts: 68

tsua hx wrote:
Zaggs wrote:


Unless of course you ignore the fact low altitude detonations can at least produce Source Region EMP pulses, or SREMP.

http://www.fas.org/irp/threat/mctl98-2/p2sec06.pdf



I didnt ignore SREMPs so much as avoid them for the sake of argument. However, I think the argument for SREMPs isnt valid as air-burst detonations are generally high(ish) yeild, and used (hypothetically) for more land-leveling purposes. A nuke detonated at 5km (3.1) miles above the earth isnt eactly the best for a "kill that giant fricken monster" situation. At least one that involves alot of potential collateral damage.


Yes but you yourself said that it would be logical they would use a tactical nuke for the purpose of keeping fallout low. Tactical nukes wouldn't be exploding high in the atmosphere as thats not tactical but strategic (for anyone/everyone else basically tactical=battlefield, strategic=city). They explode much closer to the ground.

PostPosted: Tue Jan 22, 2008 5:46 pm
 View user's profile
 Back to top 
Capitan_Barbossa
Veteran

Joined: 26 Nov 2007
Posts: 98

I know I am jumping on after 8 pages of posts, but maybe it was other ordanance?

Cruise missiles?

Bunker buster bombs?

Napalm?

Ordenance from battle ships?

PostPosted: Tue Jan 22, 2008 5:55 pm
 View user's profile
 Back to top 
tsua hx
Greenhorn


Joined: 22 Jan 2008
Posts: 6

Zaggs wrote:
tsua hx wrote:
Zaggs wrote:


Unless of course you ignore the fact low altitude detonations can at least produce Source Region EMP pulses, or SREMP.

http://www.fas.org/irp/threat/mctl98-2/p2sec06.pdf



I didnt ignore SREMPs so much as avoid them for the sake of argument. However, I think the argument for SREMPs isnt valid as air-burst detonations are generally high(ish) yeild, and used (hypothetically) for more land-leveling purposes. A nuke detonated at 5km (3.1) miles above the earth isnt eactly the best for a "kill that giant fricken monster" situation. At least one that involves alot of potential collateral damage.


Yes but you yourself said that it would be logical they would use a tactical nuke for the purpose of keeping fallout low. Tactical nukes wouldn't be exploding high in the atmosphere as thats not tactical but strategic (for anyone/everyone else basically tactical=battlefield, strategic=city). They explode much closer to the ground.


You're correct. And SREMPs can come from any low-altitude burst (equal to/less than 5km by the information you supplied). But if Im not mistaken, SD Cards arent effected by magnetism, and (again, if Im not mistaken,) a SREMP (or any EMP) will only 'knock out' some electronic equipment, not permanently disable.
Honestly my whole point was made without air-bursts in mind at all. It seems to me that if conventional weapons were used liberally to unsucessfully inflict direct-hit damage, an air-burst (shockwave) attack would seem inefficient. I was thinking more along the lines of penetrating 'bunker buster' type weaponry.

(edit: also, thanks for pointing out tactical / strategic. i knew there was a problem with my terminology...just couldnt figure it out.)

PostPosted: Tue Jan 22, 2008 6:24 pm
Last edited by tsua hx on Tue Jan 22, 2008 6:35 pm; edited 1 time in total
 View user's profile
 Back to top 
gigantis2001
Decorated


Joined: 19 Nov 2007
Posts: 282
Location: Columbus, Ohio

Capitan_Barbossa wrote:
I know I am jumping on after 8 pages of posts, but maybe it was other ordanance?

Cruise missiles?

Bunker buster bombs?

Napalm?

Ordenance from battle ships?


Couldn't be napalm; there were explosions, you didn't see fire...unless they had naplam inside an explosive of some kind so that the explosion would both ignite it and disperse it...I have no knowledge on this kind of stuff though.

PostPosted: Tue Jan 22, 2008 6:27 pm
 View user's profile
 Back to top 
Angstfild
Boot

Joined: 24 Jul 2007
Posts: 61

tsua hx wrote:
1rst time poster.

Ive browsed through this topic, and I cant say Im suprised to see all of the misconceptions of the effects of nuclear weaponry.

First, and most importantly: An EMP is symptomatic of a "high-altitude" detonation only. A high-altitude nuclear detonation produces an immediate flux of gamma rays from the nuclear reactions within the device, which interact with the Earths magnetic field. This is not an effect seen in ground-burst, air-burst, or any other terrestrial...


You are incorrect in that an EMP cannot be created at ground burst level. Ground burst and high altitude are the best case scenarios for a large and effective EMP.

http://nuclearweaponarchive.org/Nwfaq/Nfaq5.html#nfaq5.5

PostPosted: Tue Jan 22, 2008 6:37 pm
 View user's profile
 Back to top 
Nighthawk
I Have 100 Cats and Smell of Wee


Joined: 14 Jul 2007
Posts: 4751
Location: Miami, Florida, USA, Earth

Do you all seriously think that the government would drop a high yield nuclear device on the largest metropolitan area in the country with less than 24 hours notice?

Secondly, you think the military is thinking "gee, small arms fire doesn't work... let's nuke it." Uh, NO. They would take the next logical step up: get something BIGGER, but not go all the way up to the top.

Also, think about it... they need an Executive order in order to do that. I can just picture some guy walking up to the President of the United States saying "sir, we need you to blow up New York because we need to kill a 300' tall monster".

It wasn't nuclear, guys. My guess, at most, was a fuel air explosive or MOAB. Wouldn't flatten the entire island, but theoretically should be enough. But, even then, I seriously doubt they'd go that far.

My first thought was Napalm; it's the next logical step ordinance-wise.

PostPosted: Tue Jan 22, 2008 6:38 pm
 View user's profile Visit poster's website
 Back to top 
Roe
Boot

Joined: 20 Jan 2008
Posts: 58

Nighthawk wrote:

Also, think about it... they need an Executive order in order to do that. I can just picture some guy walking up to the President of the United States saying "sir, we need you to blow up New York because we need to kill a 300' tall monster".




OK, I have to ask it. If there is a 25 story tall monster kicking hell out of NYC, you think someone would be affraid to ask the president if they should nuke it or not, because it sounds silly to say there is a monster in NYC?

I'm just picking on you.

PostPosted: Tue Jan 22, 2008 6:55 pm
 View user's profile
 Back to top 
Roe
Boot

Joined: 20 Jan 2008
Posts: 58

About the sound you can hear at the end, and whether it was a nuke or not, how do we know that was the sound of Hammerdown?

As I recall the sirens started blowing when Rob is speaking into the camera and continues upto the point the tape ends.

During that whole time Rob and Beth are speaking into the camera you can hear bombing, and half of it you can hear the creature doing it's bellowing thing and the heavy walking sound. The monster sounded pretty close to them near the very end.

I can easily believe the bridge at the end simply got hit by the B2 bombs, or whatever was doing all the exploding, as the Monster came by. Leaving no clues about what Hammerdown was.

PostPosted: Tue Jan 22, 2008 7:03 pm
 View user's profile
 Back to top 
Nighthawk
I Have 100 Cats and Smell of Wee


Joined: 14 Jul 2007
Posts: 4751
Location: Miami, Florida, USA, Earth

What I was trying to say that, although someone would have to tell him, he's not simply going to say "OK then", grab the football, turn a key and nuke New York. He would need to see some serious evidence and talk with everyone he knows before making that decision.

If nuking something was as quick, effortless and thoughtless as that, Afghanistan and Iraq would be glass parking lots by now.

A nuclear detonation is a "last resort" weapon, and will be used after all possiblities have been exhausted. And I refuse to believe that "all possibilities" would be refuted in a day's time.

NON-NUCLEAR ordinance, however, can pretty much be used by anyone. A field commander can drop a MOAB or a FAD if he felt like it.

Finally, although the monster might be tear-assing through New York, he hasn't flattened the entire city yet. One has to assume there are still a considerable amount of survivors, especially considering you can't just evacuate 8 million inhabitants off an island on a whim (especially with a monster that will swat anything out of the sky). So you think the government is going to write off eight million citizens just to nuke a creature they know nothing about?

I'm surprised they didn't try to capture the thing to use it in their bio weapons division.

PostPosted: Tue Jan 22, 2008 7:05 pm
 View user's profile Visit poster's website
 Back to top 
tsua hx
Greenhorn


Joined: 22 Jan 2008
Posts: 6

Angstfild wrote:
tsua hx wrote:
1rst time poster.

Ive browsed through this topic, and I cant say Im suprised to see all of the misconceptions of the effects of nuclear weaponry.

First, and most importantly: An EMP is symptomatic of a "high-altitude" detonation only. A high-altitude nuclear detonation produces an immediate flux of gamma rays from the nuclear reactions within the device, which interact with the Earths magnetic field. This is not an effect seen in ground-burst, air-burst, or any other terrestrial...


You are incorrect in that an EMP cannot be created at ground burst level. Ground burst and high altitude are the best case scenarios for a large and effective EMP.

http://nuclearweaponarchive.org/Nwfaq/Nfaq5.html#nfaq5.5



I was incorrect. Techincally. We can nitpick about the math and work google to death over this, but Ill work from the information you supplied.

"The field strengths for ground bursts are high only in the immediate vicinity of the explosion. For smaller bombs they aren't very important because they are strong only where the destruction is intense anyway. With increasing yields, they reach farther from the zone of intense destruction. With a 1 Mt bomb, they remain significant out to the 2 psi overpressure zone (5 miles)."

Now.. obviously a 1 MT yeild is pure wankery. I think we can all agree that if a nuke is used in that situation, It would be more in the .x KT range, which would make the EMP radius for a surface burst more like 200 yards (approx. obviously.)
So, techinically youre right. A ground-burst would create detectable EMPs, and I supposed the argument could be made that MGP was still close enough (after just having taste-tested Hud) to have been within a couple hundred yards at that point... but Im still not convinced that EMPs alone should discount the nuke theory (even though i dont subscribe to it anyways).

PostPosted: Tue Jan 22, 2008 7:06 pm
 View user's profile
 Back to top 
Roe
Boot

Joined: 20 Jan 2008
Posts: 58

Nighthawk wrote:
What I was trying to say that, although someone would have to tell him, he's not simply going to say "OK then", grab the football, turn a key and nuke New York. He would need to see some serious evidence and talk with everyone he knows before making that decision.

If nuking something was as quick, effortless and thoughtless as that, Afghanistan and Iraq would be glass parking lots by now.

A nuclear detonation is a "last resort" weapon, and will be used after all possiblities have been exhausted. And I refuse to believe that "all possibilities" would be refuted in a day's time.

NON-NUCLEAR ordinance, however, can pretty much be used by anyone. A field commander can drop a MOAB or a FAD if he felt like it.

Finally, although the monster might be tear-assing through New York, he hasn't flattened the entire city yet. One has to assume there are still a considerable amount of survivors, especially considering you can't just evacuate 8 million inhabitants off an island on a whim (especially with a monster that will swat anything out of the sky). So you think the government is going to write off eight million citizens just to nuke a creature they know nothing about?

I'm surprised they didn't try to capture the thing to use it in their bio weapons division.


The best argument someone has suggested for a nuke, even with people still in Manhattan, is the infections from the parasites. We aren't told anything about why people explode when they are bit, or if their blood might affect other people. Maybe the creatures do multiply some how. It's plausible Hammerdown is meant as a containment for the little guys, as much as anything--though the open mic after the Helicopter crash specifically says, "It's still active" when it notifies of the start of Hammerdown.

Heck, maybe the military knows a lot more about this thing, other than the 7 hour attack on NYC, to base it's decision on. There's just a ton of information we aren't given, and no real way to know how the President or anyone else might act.

We do know the situation is dire, as the person talking about Hammerdown after the chopper crash does say, "God help us all." That's some pretty grave choice of words. Though it could simply be out of frustration and concern because they hadn't killed the thing yet with all the firepower they had used.

Personally, I do agree even if a small tactical nuke with low fallout could be used to take out Manhattan, the military probably had other options first before getting to that point.

PostPosted: Tue Jan 22, 2008 7:15 pm
 View user's profile
 Back to top 
Display posts from previous:   Sort by:   
Page 8 of 9 [126 Posts]   Goto page: Previous 1, 2, 3, ..., 6, 7, 8, 9 Next
View previous topicView next topic
 Forum index » Archive » Archive: Cloverfield (1-18-08) » Cloverfield: General / Updates
Jump to:  

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum
You cannot post calendar events in this forum



Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group