# Chandler Wobble **URL:** \ **Category:** Cecil's Columns/Staff Reports\ **Created:** [December 31, 1999, 11:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/chandler-wobble/403 "1999-12-31T11:25:00Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 6\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![JBENZ](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/b77776/32.png) [@JBENZ](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JBENZ)\ **Post date:** [December 31, 1999, 11:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/chandler-wobble/403/1 "1999-12-31T11:25:00Z")
Cecil sez that being off by a mile when you drop a nuke on Beijing is no big deal. [http://www.straightdope.com/columns/991203.html#update](http://www.straightdope.com/columns/991203.html#update) Mebbe so…but I would respectfully submit that if you’re trying to nuke a missile launch site or other hardened military target, being off by a mile is as good as a miss. * * * JB Lex Non Favet Delicatorum Votis ---
**Author:** ![Bubba\_blue](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/e19b73/32.png) [@Bubba\_blue](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bubba_blue)\ **Post date:** [December 31, 1999, 1:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/chandler-wobble/403/2 "1999-12-31T13:30:00Z")
Especially if the warhead in question is one of the Army’s low-yield weapons. They are just too weak to do much physical (i.e. non-radiation) damage at that distance. ---
**Author:** ![tracer](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tracer/32/20578_2.png) [@tracer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tracer)\ **Post date:** [December 31, 1999, 5:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/chandler-wobble/403/3 "1999-12-31T17:07:00Z")
According to the Chock Full o’ Missiles Page, at [http://pw1.netcom.com/~chadeast/missiles/missile.html](http://pw1.netcom.com/~chadeast/missiles/missile.html) , the Trident missile (which the letter to Cecil used as its example) is a MIRV weapon with “hard-target” kill capability. This definitely puts it within the realm of Tactical nuclear weapons, which, as the OP in this thread correctly asserts, require much more precise targeting than the “city killing” Strategic nuclear weapons. * * * The truth, as always, is more complicated than that. ---
**Author:** ![RM\_Mentock](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e274bd/32.png) [@RM\_Mentock](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RM_Mentock)\ **Post date:** [December 31, 1999, 10:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/chandler-wobble/403/4 "1999-12-31T22:35:00Z")
Jbenz That was a respectful submission, but you jumped the gun. There’s more to that story, in that column update at that link. Cecil does agree that hardened targets require precise guidance. . ---
**Author:** ![Branike](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/22d042/32.png) [@Branike](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Branike)\ **Post date:** [January 6, 2000, 12:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/chandler-wobble/403/5 "2000-01-06T00:12:00Z")
Cecil, its a small point but I’m a little suprised that you neglected to pick up on the misuse of the word dampen. Webster’s Encyclopedic Dictionary of the English Language - Dampen, dampening: to make slightly wet, moisten The proper name of the force you were looking for is damping - the addition of friction to a resonance to remove energy from it and thus reduce its magnitude. ---
**Author:** ![RM\_Mentock](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e274bd/32.png) [@RM\_Mentock](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RM_Mentock)\ **Post date:** [January 6, 2000, 5:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/chandler-wobble/403/6 "2000-01-06T05:41:00Z")
Branike That was discussed in the thread Is it Wet? (Chandler Wobble) [http://www.straightdope.com/ubb/Forum1/HTML/000361.html](http://www.straightdope.com/ubb/Forum1/HTML/000361.html) Mea culpa. .