Talk:Nuclear weapons

Additionally, the way the weapons are portrayed in the games is inconsistent - while in the "classic" Fallout games nuclear weapons are feared, respected and exceedingly rare, not to mention that arguably the most intelligent being in the Fallout world, the Master, is unwilling to unleash the power of atom again, in Fallout 3 they are commonplace and devoid of their traits from previous games - you can detonate a city with a nuclear bomb in the first few hours of the game, blow up cars in nuclear explosions and have a personal nuke launcher.

Besides for the bomb in Megaton, there are no other options in the game that actually let you use a full scale, real McCoy, nuclear bomb. This is slightly incorrect.
 * Key word: full scale. Miniature nuclear weapons in Fo3 are commonplace, which is insulting to the underlying theme of the game. 83.23.91.41 09:18, 16 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep in mind that the Fat Man is based on a real 1960's weapon. Kahlzun 13:39, March 25, 2010 (UTC)

Fallout 2
>A nuclear bomb also rests on the Enclave Oil Rig, and is, once again, used to obliterate the main enemy of the game. WTF? It was there - but the Oil Rig destruction have nothing to do with a bomb. Chosen One blew up reactor controls causing it to run above overload and explode
 * You're an idiot without any knowledge of how nuclear reactors work. A meltdown most certainly does not create a mushroom cloud, you moron. http://images2.wikia.nocookie.net/fallout/images/thumb/5/5c/Scribe.jpg/15px-Scribe.jpg Tagaziel (call!) 06:56, September 9, 2009 (UTC)

Comrade, first of all - NO ONE rigged a bomb to detonate, according to the game - no one (it is in fact impossible for player to do so). Instead it was directly stated that reactor's overload and explosion (after the Chosen One destroyed the control system) was the cause for Oil Rig's destruction.

If you are going to tell version about reactor's meldown set off the nuke - you can stop now. Modern implosion-type assemblies would be simply destroyed if receive external damage - for nuclear detonation correct detonation of explosive "lenses" must be achieved that is possible only by using bomb's firing mechanism

Power plant operations and here - it is explicitely stated that it was reactor that exploded. Have questions, comrade MikaelGrizzly? Adress them to Chris Avellone )) As for now I am removing unsupported claim--82.196.75.137 11:23, December 22, 2009 (UTC)
 * Because a nuclear weapon next to a nuclear meltdown can't possibly go off. http://images3.wikia.nocookie.net/fallout/images/thumb/4/4a/Naglowaa_se.gif/11px-Naglowaa_se.gif Tagaziel (call!) 13:00, December 22, 2009 (UTC)


 * From the Power Plant Operations memo:


 * "Without the computer systems, the reactor would go out of balance almost immediately, causing a chain-reaction bombardment of the uranium isotopes. Within two hours, or less, this would result in a nuclear explosion equivalent in the 100-kiloton range."


 * You might want to rethink your position here, Grizzly. In-game documentation would seem to contradict you.--Gothemasticator 13:36, December 22, 2009 (UTC)
 * check it, bitches, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_meltdown, "By design, the geometry and composition of the reactor core do not permit the extraordinary conditions necessary for explosively prompt criticality; no nuclear reactor can explode like a bomb." 69.140.35.147 01:52, June 19, 2010 (UTC)
 * Old discussion but it might be relevant to consider that the physics, constants and other facts of the Fallout world are rarely in line with reality and have more in common with materials of the Golden Age of science fiction and such where real world facts were either unknown or just too boring to write into a story. Take Robert A. Heinlein's(The author often credited for popularizing the whole concept of Power Armor) short stories "Blowups Happen"(1940) and its continuation "The Man Who Sold the Moon"(1949-50) in which what he refers to as "Nuclear Reactors" is basically a contained nuclear explosion and any mistake can, and in the story do, lead to a massive destructive explosion; which takes out an entire space station and spaceship.
 * If scorpion + radiation = giant scorpion and such, it's hardly a stretch to accept that nuclear reactors explode in ways similars to nuclear weapons.Dr. Lobotomy 05:50, August 10, 2011 (UTC)
 * If scorpion + radiation = giant scorpion and such, it's hardly a stretch to accept that nuclear reactors explode in ways similars to nuclear weapons.Dr. Lobotomy 05:50, August 10, 2011 (UTC)

Inconsistency again... if any...
''Additionally, the way the weapons are portrayed in the games is inconsistent - while in the "classic" Fallout games nuclear weapons are feared, respected and exceedingly rare (not to mention that arguably the most intelligent being in the Fallout world, the Master, is unwilling to unleash the power of atom again), in Fallout 3 they are commonplace and devoid of their traits from previous games. You can detonate a city with a nuclear bomb in the first few hours of the game, blow up cars in nuclear explosions and have a personal nuke launcher.''

But couldn't it be that only FULL-SCALE nukes are feared and respected? With FatMan's mininuke scale-bombs are reviewed only as powerful weapons for use? That seems rather logical

I'd say that it makes sense that nuclear devices are common in the Washington, D.C. area. Considering the proximity of The Pentagon, the White House, and pretty much every other major iconic government building, it's logical that the military would keep weapon stockpiles nearby and in large quantities, so that in the case of complete nuclear war they've got their entire arsenal on-hand. It's possible that the Fat Man was developed and restricted in use by The Pentagon, and as a result only Washington, D.C. has a collection of them (and possibly the surrounding east-coast states, I suppose). As for the "nuclear paranoia" angle: it's just a matter of growing up in different circumstances. On the west coast, icons like The Glow, Mariposa, and the Gecko reactor all serve as ominous relics of the nuclear age and all the horrors it brought. The war-damage aside, the only lasting nuclear weapon elements on the east-coast are the craters near Fort Bannister, and the unexploded bomb in the center of Megaton, complete with its very own cult proclaiming that it isn't something to fear. The west coast learned to fear nuclear technology (and their map reveals they were probably hit harder by it to begin with), and the east coast just accepts it as a pre-war relic that you sometimes find in working order. It's just different culture. Hell, there's almost not even the mention of nuclear technology when you're in Pittsburgh (The Pitt), which was almost completely left unscathed by the initial attack. RadAway 06:42, March 24, 2010 (UTC)

What's with the Gecko reactor? Peaceful nuclear energy is harnessed on the West Coast and is commonplace - most generators utilize fission (and uranium from Broken Hills)

Entire City Destruction
"They were first used on the Japanese cities of Nagasaki and Hiroshima in August 1945 at the end of the Second World War. These two explosions could be seen as the start of the end of the world, because without them humans would never have possessed the power to wipe out entire cities."

This is an incorrect statement, as the two Japanese bombs were the first used in war, and the concept had been developed as early as the mid 1910's, with a detonation at the Trinity site on July 16, 1945.

Germany was developing their own nuclear program, and under slightly different conditions, could have developed their own bomb.

Nuclear weapons were an inevitable development in our history.Kahlzun 13:37, March 25, 2010 (UTC)

luckily they also led to the development of nuclear reactors, which are at this point the only thing able to save us from oil 69.140.35.147 01:55, June 19, 2010 (UTC)

'Inconsistency'
''Additionally, the way the weapons are portrayed in the games is inconsistent - while in the "classic" Fallout games nuclear weapons are feared, respected and exceedingly rare (not to mention that arguably the most intelligent being in the Fallout world, the Master, is unwilling to unleash the power of atom again), in Fallout 3 they are commonplace and devoid of their traits from previous games. You can detonate a city with a nuclear bomb in the first few hours of the game, blow up cars in nuclear explosions and have a personal nuke launcher. ''

Does this bit of Bethseda bashing really belong in the article?

1. If the Master 'is unwilling to unleash the power of the atom again' then why does he take the Nuclear Bomb he finds to his base? (also, why does there just happen to be a seperate elevator leading down to a single room in what is supposed to be a demonstration Vault?)

2. You detonate one bomb in Fallout, you cause a Nuclear Meltdown in Fallout 2 and you detonate one bomb in Fallout 3. The way it says 'in the first few hours' suggests you detonate bombs often, if you know what to do you can detonate one in Fallout in ten minutes http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WzSOKi_t5fg. Where is the commonplace, the cars? They are powered by Nuclear Fusion, just like in Fallout 2, and the little (impossible) mushroom cloud is used because they are iconic of all things Nuclear; stupid yes but it doesn't count as a 'nuke'.

3. Can't argue with the stupidness of the Fatman, that is too far, even if it is based off a real 50's gun. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Davy_Crockett_(nuclear_device)

If this infomation does belong in the article can it not be re-written in a less biased way. The language used like, 'classic Fallout games' and 'in the first few hours' is obviously supposed to highlight 'how much Bethseda have fucked-up Fallout again'. Adam James Walker 09:03, August 27, 2010 (UTC)
 * Bethesda did fuck up Fallout, though. --TheBearPaw 10:00, August 27, 2010 (UTC)


 * Camp Searchlight is a military installation in the southeastern Mojave Wasteland. The New California Republic once held this camp as their own, until Caesar's Legion detonated a nuclear device within the camp


 * The Fat Man is a weapon in Fallout: New Vegas.


 * ^two quotes from this very wiki. Damn Obsidian Entertainment crapping all over the spirit of Fallout by having whole settlements wiped out with nuclear weapons and letting you toss mini-nukes around!
 * Yeah obviously that was sarcasm. Just love pointing out how 90% of the fanboy's 'complaints' about Bethesda are things they wouldn't care in the least about if it were the original developers. {{Unsigned]}
 * Huh? The Fat Man is still a stupid weapon and idea, no matter the developer. As for the "nuclear device" the Caesar's Legion detonated, we don't know what type it was or what yield did it have. In fact, I believe that the weapon in question was a "dirty bomb", rather than a proper nuke, so apart from the Fat Man, New Vegas sticks closer to the Fallout spirit than Fallout 3 still. http://images1.wikia.nocookie.net/fallout/images/0/08/Personal_Sig_Image.gif Tagaziel (call!) 11:44, September 14, 2010 (UTC)

Fallout : New Vegas - Dud Atom Bomb
Hi Guys, Found this on a wander around the desert - was protected by three Mutant Masters - very hard to kill.

http://www.glowfoto.com/viewimage.php?img=30-180428L&rand=3558&t=jpg&m=10&y=2010&srv=img5

and its location

http://www.glowfoto.com/viewimage.php?img=30-202426L&rand=2130&t=jpg&m=10&y=2010&srv=img4

Told me it was a dud and asked if I wanted to salvage the parts.

Metro Tunnel Rat

Sources?
What are the sources for the Post-Divergence section? The article mentions 10-20 kilotons weapons while the FO1 Manual, the only listed source, specifies 200 to 750 kilotons(in a way that's unclear whether it's for the FO universe or the real world). Then Neutron Bombs are mentioned with a description that would more accurately be applied to theoretical Salted bombs. And the electromagnetic pulses obviously did not have a major effect as nearly every game in the series has several locations, which couldn't possibly have shielded anything from the pulses, still having fully operational machines, computers and (pulse grenade vulnerable)robots.Dr. Lobotomy 06:33, February 6, 2011 (UTC)

Possible wrong inconsistency
I think that the U.S and various countries did opt for a vertically dropped bomb. My reasoning is that missiles require fuel, such as Gasoline. And the resource wars which lead to the Sino-American War, which subsequently lead to the Great War. The Resource Wars was fought over Crude Oil, which when refined and processed is made into Gasoline. With dwindling supplies of Gasoline I believe they would opt for vertically dropped bombs. Gasoline evaporates, even in containers so the missiles wouldn't be able to launch. The reason orbital missiles still could've launched is because for evaporation to begin you need oxygen, and there is no oxygen in space. Even with a Fission battery or such it would power it not provide it with propulsion.

I also wish to bring the inconsistency of the missile at Fort Constantine. If you read the above, gasoline evaporates. So how could the missile launch when the gasoline evaporated within a couple years? Even if they used alternatives such as diesel or ethanol it would still evaporate. And I doubt the alternatives would be available as the Resource Wars was fought over them because they were dwindling resources.

Nuchiha101 05:57, June 11, 2011 (UTC)
 * A wise man does his research. A man that is not wise posts silly things on the Vault's talk pages. http://images1.wikia.nocookie.net/fallout/images/0/08/Personal_Sig_Image.gif Tagaziel (call!) 06:34, June 11, 2011 (UTC)

10-20 kilotons
This claim is unsourced and inconsistent with the description of what was done during the Great War > ''Entire mountain ranges were created as the ground buckled and moved under the strain of the cataclysmic pressure produced by numerous, concentrated atomic explosions.... the climate changed horrifically'' this is the evidence of megaton-range nuclear munitions - not 10-20 kiloton (they also produce little fallout because use only relatively clean fission of Pu-239)

Requesting the removal of both the post divergence and inconsistencies sections
The removal or at the very least a complete rewrite. Both consists of unsourced or erroneous facts, strong likelihood of original research and use of supposed real world logic which does not always apply to the Fallout world based on the often wild ideas of the golden age of science fiction and other retro-futurist materials.

I'd remove them myself but I'm hesitant to just go ahead and blank out more than half an article. Dr. Lobotomy 03:55, August 6, 2011 (UTC)
 * You're right, blanking half of the article because you don't like it is not going to happen. Either propose a rewrite incorporating the facts already present on the article or don't mention it. http://images1.wikia.nocookie.net/fallout/images/0/08/Personal_Sig_Image.gif Tagaziel (call!) 07:56, August 6, 2011 (UTC)
 * But the facts in the article are wrong, like it or not, it makes little difference. So I can't propose a rewrite when there exist no sources supporting the "facts". Examples from the article:
 * "Fallout 3 nuclear weapons are commonplace and devoid of their traits from previous games. You can detonate a city with a nuclear bomb in the first few hours of the game, blow up cars in nuclear explosions". Cars are weapons? And one bomb in one city hardly qualify as "commonplace". As for the bombs at Fort Constantine, one can't fault the logic of finding bombs in a bomb storage facility.
 * "It seems unlikely that the USAF would opt for both vertical- dropped and silo- launched nuclear weapons" and "The United States however, had the option of silos, therefore did not require bomber aircraft. In other words, if a nation had the option of silos and ballistic missiles, they'd opt for those rather than cumbersome vertical- drop techniques" |Operation Chrome Dome lasted until 1968, the |B83 nuclear bomb came into service in 1983 with 650 built and still technically in service.
 * "When Liberty Prime is destroyed in Fallout 3, there is no radioactive fallout, nor is there a scorched radius or a mushroom cloud- the explosion is only tiny in comparison to an actual nuclear weapon. The same can be said about the Mobile Base Crawler in the Broken Steel add-on when it is destroyed by an orbital strike- again, there was just an explosion, and not the radioactive, flaming by- products of a nuclear warhead." The same can be said when returning to the site of the Cathedral in Fallout 1 moments after a nuclear explosion no radiation which indicates there is consistency between games in the series.
 * "while the EMP released from the blasts destroyed electronics worldwide" This is largely disproved throughout the series, with everything from light bulbs to robots(horribly vulnerable to EMP weapons as seen in pretty much all Fallout games) and computers being seen operational in unshielded locations. Intentional EMP strikes come from high yield weapons(Megaton range going by real world cold war planning) detonated at stratospheric altitudes and can blanket areas ranging from a radius of several hundred miles to easily the entirety of the continental US depending on altitude and yield. A low altitudes, like the ones nuclear weapons are detonated at when the aim is to destroy cities(air burst), the radius of the EMP created is shorter than the thermal and blast effects' radius; so the EMP is largely irrelevant seeing that anything it could damage will have been melted and/or blasted to pieces anyway.
 * So in conclusion, I politely reiterate my request of removing the majority of the article sections "post divergence" and "inconsistencies" due to lack of verifiable sources, inaccurate facts and original research which do not comply with the criteria listed at The Vault:Content policy specifically:
 * All content needs to be accurate. The Vault aims to provide reliable information. In particular, adding speculation and own inventions (fan fiction, fan art etc.) to articles should be avoided.
 * All content needs to be verifiable. Other editors need to be able to check and verify it.
 * Again, I would remove the sections myself but I am hesitant due to the fact that I do not see how a rewrite is possible seeing the lack of canon sources on the subject, that I wish to avoid an edit-war and that an administrator has shot me down regardless of the Vault's policies to |assume good faith. Dr. Lobotomy 18:17, August 6, 2011 (UTC)
 * As far as weapons go, it all depends on how it is used, even IRL trying to run someone down with a car would equate to an 'Assault with a Deadly Weapon' charge. Deliberately blowing something up to cause someone harm would in fact allow it to be considered a weapon. UserGreatMara.png pistol.png 18:24, August 6, 2011 (UTC)
 * Well my point, perhaps not correctly or insufficiently worded, was that nuclear powered cars which reactors' stability and containment has decayed over centuries leading to such volatility that a few bullets will make them explode do not really qualify as purposefully designed nuclear weapons. (If the cars where meant to explode right out of the factory though, it certainly would have made common traffic accidents exciting, lol) Dr. Lobotomy 18:32, August 6, 2011 (UTC)

And again - where does the figure 10-20 kiloton come from - because it contradict the lore and the Fallout bible (which state 500-700 kiloton). 10-20 kiloton warheads are...well not the thing to be so much dreaded in the first place.--82.196.80.163 19:05, October 29, 2011 (UTC)