Thank you Mr. Perry for your videos. I was raised with nightmares of “The Day After”... and I don’t relish them. But each generation needs to be shocked into understanding the dangers of nuclear weapons
There is a serious flaw in this scenario, hitting a nuclear bomb with a conventional bomb would not set it off. To Detonate a nuclear bomb a number of very precisely timed explosions are required in a specific order. In general, the more precise the timing, the more effective the explosion will be and the more you can obtain from the critical mass before it begins to disrupt itself. Timing to this degree of precision is one of the hardest problems to solve in designing a bomb. If the explosives on a nuclear warhead are detonated by another explosion, they will not be in the correct sequence. The most you are likely to see is a trivial blast which will be completely hidden by the incoming bomb. The incremental effect will be negligible.
I know this is a response to a year old comment. You are so right. The worst that could happen with the conventional strike on a nuke would be to create a little "dirty bomb". Since it wasn't a dirty bomb by design the consequences would not be as dire as a properly constructed one.
@@PC4USE1 See the following: www.armscontrolwonk.com/archive/404598/safe-nuclear-weapons/ "The United States has a “one-point safety” standard for all of its nuclear weapons. This standard means that the probability of achieving a nuclear yield greater than four pounds of TNT must not exceed one in a million for any event involving the initiation of the warhead’s high explosive at a single point on its periphery. The United States achieved this exacting safety standard after decades of effort, significant investment, and a learning curve derived from nuclear testing. " www.jstor.org/stable/4412275?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents
@@Pete3Heat Wouldn't a non shaped charge disintegrate the fissile material before it went critical. Unless it was an implosion not an explosion.Not a ballistics expert or physicist but just a point of order.
@@PC4USE1 not necessarily, most modern nuclear weapons use some for of gas boosting for the primary stage (this is totally separate from the fusion that goes on in the secondary stage). Gas boosting allows the for a smaller mass of fissile material to be used in the primary, as such the primary is less probe to accidental detonation. This is important because an accidental detonation of the high explosive intinator will create a population of source neutrons that in a non gas boosted weapon is likely to encounter a fizzle yield (of maybe 0.1-20 kT). This is revelant because some Pakistani designs (I think) don't use gas boosting for the primary, they just use a subcritical mass of plutonium with a reflector. This makes their weapon systems note prone to accidental detonation via a conventional high explosive.
INDIA NUCLEAR POLICY HAS ISSUE 1. India will always follow " no first use policy" 2.INDIA will never under no condition use nuclear weapons on non nuclear state 3.If any kind of biological, chemical weapons are use on India even by non nuclear state ,India will use nuclear weapons
correction a conventional bomb is unlikely to start a nuclear detonation. more likely that it would spread radioactive material over the surrounding area by way of the conventional detonation and the resulting fire. otherwise good vid
Interesting, this video starts out with a militant pakistani group attacking India. One never hears about militant groups from India attacking Pakistan. I wonder why?
I think each country will send two bombs but that the rest of the war would be a WWI-style trench war resulting in 100 millions casualties as the peasants would be among the first to be massacred. I would end in a stalemate with China taking up what remains of Pakistan while India would remain neutral like Franco's Spain.
Who denoted first nuclear bomb? USA Who is creating unstablity in middle East for oil? USA Who has nuclear weapons deployment around the world ? USA Who is always trying attempt coup in other countries? USA WHO placed a dictator in Iran by throwing democratically elected govt? USA Which countries weapons are used in Yemen to schools and hospitals? USA India has no first use policy and India works for betterment of human society .
Oh come now, the whole idea behind this video starts that a militant group from Pakistan begins trouble and a whole conflagration grow from it. Everyone knows Pakistan is a terror state.
India and Pakistan together have less than 300 nukes and how many nukes are tested by US and USSR .... much more than 300 I guess and they have far more powerful Nuke than Indian and Pakistan. LoL, nothing will happen to the rest of the world ... Only the involving countries and their immediate neighbour like Afghanistan, Iran, Nepal will face most trouble, Bangladesh to a less extend but Pakistan does not have an adequate missile to hit far East of India and thus affecting country like Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, Myanmar etc. Parts of China will be affected but China is big enough and they will be able to deal with it.
It's the marking used by Indian Air Force on their aircraft rudders (what looks red is actually orange); the other marking is a green circle surronded by a white and - more externally - by an orange one.
I mean Perry you should look at yourselves. West wat at the brink during cuban missile crisis. Recently again witn Russian Ukrainian war, we see high probability of at least the use of strategic nuclear weapons. So stop making condescending documentaries on south asian countries.
Thank you Mr. Perry for your videos. I was raised with nightmares of “The Day After”... and I don’t relish them. But each generation needs to be shocked into understanding the dangers of nuclear weapons
Thank you Mr. Perry. You are a treasure of knowledge, wisdom and compassion to the world.
There is a serious flaw in this scenario, hitting a nuclear bomb with a conventional bomb would not set it off.
To Detonate a nuclear bomb a number of very precisely timed explosions are required in a specific order. In general, the more precise the timing, the more effective the explosion will be and the more you can obtain from the critical mass before it begins to disrupt itself. Timing to this degree of precision is one of the hardest problems to solve in designing a bomb.
If the explosives on a nuclear warhead are detonated by another explosion, they will not be in the correct sequence. The most you are likely to see is a trivial blast which will be completely hidden by the incoming bomb. The incremental effect will be negligible.
I know this is a response to a year old comment. You are so right. The worst that could happen with the conventional strike on a nuke would be to create a little "dirty bomb". Since it wasn't a dirty bomb by design the consequences would not be as dire as a properly constructed one.
@@PC4USE1 See the following:
www.armscontrolwonk.com/archive/404598/safe-nuclear-weapons/
"The United States has a “one-point safety” standard for all of its nuclear weapons. This standard means that the probability of achieving a nuclear yield greater than four pounds of TNT must not exceed one in a million for any event involving the initiation of the warhead’s high explosive at a single point on its periphery. The United States achieved this exacting safety standard after decades of effort, significant investment, and a learning curve derived from nuclear testing.
"
www.jstor.org/stable/4412275?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents
If the nuclear warhead is of a later design it does not have the one point safe design, thus can be detonated by a conventional bomb.
@@Pete3Heat Wouldn't a non shaped charge disintegrate the fissile material before it went critical. Unless it was an implosion not an explosion.Not a ballistics expert or physicist but just a point of order.
@@PC4USE1 not necessarily, most modern nuclear weapons use some for of gas boosting for the primary stage (this is totally separate from the fusion that goes on in the secondary stage). Gas boosting allows the for a smaller mass of fissile material to be used in the primary, as such the primary is less probe to accidental detonation. This is important because an accidental detonation of the high explosive intinator will create a population of source neutrons that in a non gas boosted weapon is likely to encounter a fizzle yield (of maybe 0.1-20 kT). This is revelant because some Pakistani designs (I think) don't use gas boosting for the primary, they just use a subcritical mass of plutonium with a reflector. This makes their weapon systems note prone to accidental detonation via a conventional high explosive.
INDIA NUCLEAR POLICY HAS ISSUE
1. India will always follow " no first use policy"
2.INDIA will never under no condition use nuclear weapons on non nuclear state
3.If any kind of biological, chemical weapons are use on India even by non nuclear state ,India will use nuclear weapons
Objection!
It seems a bit implausible that 'the intense bombardment causes one of the warheads to detonate'.
Look up "Zero Point Safe Nuclear Weapons"
Denied.
Will a nuke can be denoted not by the war head if you blow it up enough
That’s doesn’t happen in real life it will only spread radiation
May God save us all from such horrible scenario🙏
Why would a nuke go full yield from a conventional weapon strike? Does Pakistan have bomb designs that are that crazy?
This could happen we must stand against nuke war
Well that was cheerful! Got any more for us, Doc?
3:08 that is impossible it would just let out radiation it wouldn’t make the nuke detonate
Isn’t water in China already contaminated?
Not with nuclear falllout though
correction a conventional bomb is unlikely to start a nuclear detonation. more likely that it would spread radioactive material over the surrounding area by way of the conventional detonation and the resulting fire.
otherwise good vid
Good animantion
>H.P. Lovecraft liked this video
Let's do this
Interesting, this video starts out with a militant pakistani group attacking India. One never hears about militant groups from India attacking Pakistan. I wonder why?
I think each country will send two bombs but that the rest of the war would be a WWI-style trench war resulting in 100 millions casualties as the peasants would be among the first to be massacred. I would end in a stalemate with China taking up what remains of Pakistan while India would remain neutral like Franco's Spain.
lol why would they ever try to explode a vehicle carrying a nuke
They likely could assume that the nuke is one-point safe, as the video points out, or believe that the nuke is about to be launched.
Who denoted first nuclear bomb?
USA
Who is creating unstablity in middle East for oil?
USA
Who has nuclear weapons deployment around the world ?
USA
Who is always trying attempt coup in other countries?
USA
WHO placed a dictator in Iran by throwing democratically elected govt?
USA
Which countries weapons are used in Yemen to schools and hospitals?
USA
India has no first use policy and India works for betterment of human society .
under the current govt im not so sure a madman like modi can and will do anything to satisfy is hunger for power
Smart guy
A little outdated now, but good.
Oh come now, the whole idea behind this video starts that a militant group from Pakistan begins trouble and a whole conflagration grow from it. Everyone knows Pakistan is a terror state.
Nothing of value was lost
well nothing in pakistan
Buhahahahahah What the fuck man.... You must be a writer of Road Runner cartoons...
are you from pakistan
Wtf...those nukes should have some safety mechanisms....
th-cam.com/video/NVnwc4rZI_0/w-d-xo.html
Wonder if I could get some customer service that both speaks and understands English well after this? Probably not..
India and Pakistan together have less than 300 nukes and how many nukes are tested by US and USSR .... much more than 300 I guess and they have far more powerful Nuke than Indian and Pakistan. LoL, nothing will happen to the rest of the world ... Only the involving countries and their immediate neighbour like Afghanistan, Iran, Nepal will face most trouble, Bangladesh to a less extend but Pakistan does not have an adequate missile to hit far East of India and thus affecting country like Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, Myanmar etc. Parts of China will be affected but China is big enough and they will be able to deal with it.
pakistan has the strongest missile system you can dream of. and no...it will affect the whole world because of the nuclear winter.
Not if the Himalayas are Contaminated.
I was buying it for a minute but everybody knows Australia's not a real place.
This is what happens when Pakistan is allowed to have nuclear weapons
😂
Pakistan is a threat to world security
exactly. Why just give the ayatollahs in iran a few nukes. Wouldn’t be any worse.
Isn't science grand
It's going to get a lot worse with A.I. progressing.
He says, unironically, across the internet - where thousands around the globe can receive his message. :p
Why are the Indians using fighter jets with Italian markings??
It's the marking used by Indian Air Force on their aircraft rudders (what looks red is actually orange); the other marking is a green circle surronded by a white and - more externally - by an orange one.
@@keltdevangel1 You are close, it is not orange but saffron.
I mean Perry you should look at yourselves. West wat at the brink during cuban missile crisis. Recently again witn Russian Ukrainian war, we see high probability of at least the use of strategic nuclear weapons. So stop making condescending documentaries on south asian countries.
William is on Payroll of #RSS lol
teri ammi ko ham rss wale chode gai
Tea was fantastic....😜😜😜
So was east Pakistan
@Dev Narayan S.S tomatical strike subzigical strike then digital strike against china🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
Cute. I like that.
lol. bs. this could never happen. only in a ludicrous hollywood movie it is possible
Hollywood movie? More like Bollywood movie.
fake story
if someone is going to use nukes then it is jewmerica
anti-Semite Nazi.