How much armor would need to become impervious to any damage?

>needing armor
Amateurs

Attached: 1518790444870m.jpg (1024x919, 90K)

someone post the screencap....

While hardness is an aspect of armor, cross sectional density, among other aspects, are also extremely important.

if you could hit a 1 mile thick piece of steel with enough .22 short it would go through it.

An underwater bunker could be impervious to bunker busters.

based retard

Attached: 35A66CFF-75C8-4E8F-99CA-5A61F5BD7604.png (640x480, 227K)

mate, it took 2 nukes to make the prinzbeugen (a cruiser, not even a bs)
topple over, it didnt even sink completely, so take your chances.

My dick

that was the USS arkansas, and the blast totally capsized and sank it
it's circled in red in pic related

Attached: bakershot.jpg (960x504, 198K)

This!

Attached: LameClearcutIlsamochadegu-size_restricted.gif (444x250, 3.89M)

no but it'll sink so who cares

The USS Arkansas. She sank like a rock. And while 170 yards from surface zero is damn close to a nuke, it's not exactly a direct hit by the standards of anything non-nuclear.
Of course, if anyone bothers to toss a nuke at a ship today odds are pretty good it'll have a yield ten times that of Crossroads Baker.

Attached: 1145145777417.jpg (1600x1228, 335K)

the Saratoga, further away, had the whole bottom knocked out of it by the nuke and sank straight down
there are reports even today of people flying over the test site and still seeing the Saratoga sitting there
and yeah, Crossroads Baker was a tiny little thing compared by today's standards

I've survived a nuke as well. The trick is simply to not be all that close to it (basically the other side of the planet in my case). And no, you do not take your chances on no one managing to put a warhead within a quarter mile or so of your ship, ASMs today rarely have a CEP measured in hundreds of metres.

It's just dynamite in the water.

>Let's say someone made a battleship with 2 meter thick armor of pure steel.
We have mach 10 missiles in service, it would go through about 100 meters of steel with ease.

newfag detected

Attached: 1468260887944.jpg (1024x768, 208K)

That gif is of the second test and it definitely sunk. The Arkansas survived the first test

Steel is weak in comparison. The only armor that could stop all modern arms would be dealing with theoretical physics, like temperatures below absolute zero that could deal away with the energy output.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massive_Ordnance_Penetrator

Nukes aren't actually that good against hard targets like battleships and bunkers. The main ways in which nukes kill things is heat and blast. It worked really well against Hiroshima and Nagasaki because their houses were all made of wood. People exaggerate what nukes can do because they are low IQ retards who haven't read anything about the subject.

iirc USS nevada was the only "survivor" from all those test ?.

>theoretical physics, like temperatures below absolute zero
user, that isn't theoretical physics, that's simply you not knowing physics.

Yeah I'd love to see you say that to my face. I'm a United States Marine.

You've survived a nuke?

Explains a lot really

>tfw muzzle velocity is measured in %C.

Attached: 1537632155426.jpg (720x479, 84K)

You should look into it, since temperature isn't as simple as zero to infinity. Adding energy does not always mean increasing its entropy, so it's possible to get matter in a state that is very slightly below 0 Kelvin with our technology. You would know as much if you googled it before calling people stupid.

nice teenager reddit meme. you can leave now bro

What's wrong with people like you? You've picked up a pebble of knowledge and suddenly you're so fucking desperate to show off what you think is an entire mountain range.
Yes, we know that battleships are relatively hard targets for a nuke. We know that simply dropping a nuke ten miles away isn't likely to get much done. But contrary to what you're implying (by stupidity or a crippling inability to communicate) this doesn't make the ship nuke-proof. It simply means that we have to get the warhead within maybe a hundred meters or so for a small tactical warhead to destroy OP's impossibly well armoured fantasy ship outright. You know, as opposed to conventional munitions against a normal battleship which can score a direct hit and still not do much if they don't hit a good spot. It's like you've heard of nukes taking out entire cities in one go (as they've done) and think that means you can't aim them any better than minute-of-zip-code.

Yeah, the French popped one off in '96. But since I was pretty far away from it (maybe 15000-20000 km as the bird flies) I survived. Prinz Eugen likewise made it through two nuclear blasts without sinking outright on account of not being too close to them.

It could keep propelling itself upward. Are you devoid of imagination?

A slow moving but unstoppable giant gun that fires upon all shores. It could also anchor itself on stilts it lowers into the ground then send out soldiers to gather more fuel if not a giant nuclear fission behemoth. Even if no fueling often it'd need new things for the batteries yeah? Then again, now that I'm thinking, it could just use rail guns after destroying it's prey and fire anything it wants at everything.

>200 ft
Psh of soil I'm sure.
>still that's ridiculous what the fuck are they trying to destroy with such overkill? Absolute terror fields?

Colder objects have atoms that are slower moving so it'd be harder to penetrate though ironically shatter easier due to density. Harder is probably a bad idea though, not him. You don't want to shatter you want to dent. Cracking every time some giant missile hits you would be problematic unless it could magically heal.

Go easy on him, he only has a theoretical degree in physics.

>believing the anime nuke meme
kek

Sorry user, that buzzword salad might fool a few of the teens around here, but that isn't exactly a grand achievement. Anyone who remembers what temperature is on the other hand will know the bullish for what it is straight away.

>the ship's crew would be irradiated though so they'd still die
not through all the armor and decks

So you didn't even bother to read the Wikipedia page. That's just kind of sad, honestly.

no, i'm not even that user, you're a fucking idiot, zero-point energy may not be real at all, and we certainly cannot go below 0 kelvin yet

go back

>What's wrong with people like you? You've picked up a pebble of knowledge and suddenly you're so fucking desperate to show off what you think is an entire mountain range.

I've been reading about this subject for twenty years and made a completely anodyne statement about it. Why did you have this spergout?

>sub 0K
kek

It's already been done. Only billionths of a degree centigrade, but you can google it yourself.

>It's like you've heard of nukes taking out entire cities in one go (as they've done)

this has never actually happened

hiroshima and nagasaki only destroyed a small portion of each city. pic related.

why are you pretending to know something about this subject when you clearly know nothing? it is obvious that you are just repeating what you were told in videogames and movies.

Attached: u7elXtYn1Dt36R2d1G_Kn5q6MP92nMnEHbjMQOQBh-8.jpg (1229x1171, 409K)

>fill a few subs with tnt
>fake your nuke test

to be fair the nukes in stock now are much more powerful than the bombs dropped on hiroshima/nagasaki although they've never been used on cities.

>Of course, if anyone bothers to toss a nuke at a ship today odds are pretty good it'll have a yield ten times that of Crossroads Baker
And why is that?

What would that same gun do to an Abrams?

Not necessarily. Tactical nukes are sometimes less than half a kiloton. Any metropolitan are that gets nuked would probably be hit by a MIRV rather than one single warhead. Nukes today aren’t as powerful as they were in the 60s.

Dude like just make the armor out of passports

Attached: 472_saeed_alghamdi_passport2050081722-13059.jpg (260x365, 12K)

Learn physics, pussy

The fact that you think 2 meters of steel will do jack shit against 1 tonne shaped charge warhead is really funny.

tactical casaba howitzer WHEN

You can push this meme as much as you want user, but it isnt going to stick

go on

ask me how i can tell youre still in high school

Came here to post this. As long as shit like that remains within the realm of possibility, there's no such thing as "enough armor". In any case, weapons like MOPs and whatever the DoD ended up doing with Shiva Star are pretty good bets for fucking up hardened targets like this.

Attached: Shiva_star.jpg (2100x1666, 2.83M)

That'd sink on land let alone in the water.

Neutrinos

>be possible to
Possible 'for' is the term you are groping for, mouth breather.

2000mm RHSA can be breached by a modern MBT.

A single torpedo would sink it.

>attempt to propagate "nukes are fake" just like flat earth
Kill yourself.

The problem with pure steel is that once you get a small crack forming at the point of impact, that crack is going to split the rest of the metal like a biscuit. There's a reason why ships use mulitple layers of steel plate along their hulls.

You wouldn't need to launch missiles, it'd sink under its own weight

Start with the moon.
Distance is key so be some where else.

get out.

Attached: 1565279398037.gif (390x259, 982K)

"A one-kiloton fission device, shaped properly, could make a hole ten feet in diameter a thousand feet into solid rock." - Ted Taylor

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shaped_charge#Nuclear_shaped_charges

Why dont we use this for mining, it sounds based as fuck

Thats a lot more then a few subs mate.

Project Plowshare was a thing, but we stopped because it kept kicking up massive radioactive dust plumes.

There's an unrelated video somewhere of a nuke being used to close a natural gas fire though.

Attached: you have to go back to reddit.jpg (936x960, 302K)

project marauder never happened, don't pay mind to it.

But user, Dragonforce is the world’s hardest metal

A Mark 48 would waste it. Or a cruise missile.