• pandapoo@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    117
    ·
    edit-2
    2 days ago

    Intentionally misleading headline, but not technically incorrect.

    These are designed to carry troops through an irradiated battle space and keep them safe from the fallout. At least while they’re inside and the filtration systems are functioning properly.

    That doesn’t mean they were magically enhanced to be impervious to antimaterial weapons, or other types of kinetic damage that happen in combat.

    • setsneedtofeed@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 day ago

      The article’s premise is that it is a very particular vehicle, the use of which points to scraping deep into the reserves.

      • Duamerthrax@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        1 day ago

        Yeah, that’s the real story. They’re dragging out museum pieces. People who have been anticipating the T34 showing up are getting real excited.

    • NiHaDuncan@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      23
      ·
      2 days ago

      Thanks for this, I didn’t know people thought that nuclear-proof meant that it could literally take a nuke. I certainly hope people haven’t been thinking that a MOPP suit will make one a super soldier impervious to nukes or anything considered a chemical (which could be interpreted as all matter).

      • eronth@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        2 days ago

        That’s what I’d assume based on the name. If it’s radiation/fallout proof, I’d expect them to list it that way.

        • FuglyDuck@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          2 days ago

          I assumed it was designed to survive some proximity to a nuclear strike. But definitely not a close-hit, or direct strike.

          Far enough away and shielded enough that the flash of radiation doesn’t render its occupants immediately dead.

      • hamFoilHat@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        2 days ago

        I know I was assuming that the Russians claimed that they were nuclear bomb proof, at least for the 30 seconds that I knew about them before I read this thread. Seeing the picture I didn’t believe that they were in in actuality.

      • FordBeeblebrox@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 day ago

        Most people still think the explosion at Chernobyl was an accident.

        What are you talkin about, everyone knows the longer you sweat in a MOPP suit the more rad resistance you develop, especially on a hot day

    • frezik@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      edit-2
      2 days ago

      Plus, even if it was that kind of nuclear-proof, all that really means is that it can take the pressure of nuclear explosion over its body. Devices based on point pressure, like the kind used in anti-armor rounds or bunker buster bombs, can and do punch through nuclear-hardened targets.

      • remotelove@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        14
        ·
        2 days ago

        As an example, RPGs use shaped charges to send a jet a molten copper through armor steel. Even though the devices may seem antiquated, they are extremely effective at burning holes through tanks. If that molten jet happens to come in contact with ammunition, it’s generally game over.

          • remotelove@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 day ago

            I have heard a few things, TBH. Everything in the range from simply vaporized and hot to the vaporized metal being in a near plasma state. Shrug.

            Wikipedia gives a few numbers ranging from 660K to almost 1200K (copper melt temp is 1358K) from testing it quotes. It seems to be dependent on the cone alloy and the explosive type.

            In practice, it’s probably is all over the place in regards to temperature. If you can round up a few RPGs, I would totally be down for some testing…