A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Military Aviation
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Czechoslovak nuclear weapons? Warszaw Pact War Plans ( The Effects of a Global Thermonuclear War ...)



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
  #10  
Old January 16th 04, 01:23 AM
John Mullen
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Kevin Brooks wrote:

"Chad Irby" wrote in message
m...

In article ,
"Kevin Brooks" wrote:


Having actually seen a SADM (minus a real core, of course), I can tell


you

it is not a "suitcase" device, unless you haul around one hell of a
suitcase. It is closer in size to a garbage can (like the large kitchen
variety). It pressed the ability of being a manportable device (the guy
lugging it on his back could not carry much else in the way of mission
equipment). As the Nuclear Weapons Archive describes it: "It was a


cylinder

40 cm by 60 cm, and weighed 68 kg (the actual warhead portion weighed


only

27 kg). Although the Mk-54 SADM has itself been called a "suitcase bomb"


it

is more like a "steamer trunk" bomb, especially considering its weight."


But there is a rather scary little piece about suitcase nukes at the
Nuclear Weapons Archive, which says about suitcase nukes:

"We can now try to estimated the absolute minimum possible mass for a
bomb with a significant yield. Since the critical mass for alpha-phase
plutonium is 10.5 kg, and an additional 20-30% of mass is needed to make
a significant explosion, this implies 13 kg or so. A thin beryllium
reflector can reduce this by a couple of kilograms, but the necessary
high explosive, packaging, triggering system, etc. will add mass, so the
true absolute minimum probably lies in the range of 11-15 kg (and is
probably closer to 15 than 11)."

http://nuclearweaponarchive.org/News/DoSuitcaseNukesExist.html



He is talking apparently about the nuclear material in the core only being
somewhere around 11-13 kg (it is going to take more than 2 to 4 kilograms of
HE, Be, triggers, etc to handle the rest of the equation); in that same
article he refers to the W-54 as being the smallest practical sherical
device ever fielded, and then also describes the linear implosion devices
(which are narrower, but also longer) used in arty rounds. None of the
fielded weapons ever got below around 100 pounds or so.


That isn't how I understood it.

'This is probably a fair description of the W-54 Davy Crockett warhead.
This warhead was the lightest ever deployed by the US, with a minimum
mass of about 23 kg (it also came in heavier packages)'

John

 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Warszaw Pact War Plans ( The Effects of a Global Thermonuclear War ...) Keith Willshaw Military Aviation 2 December 10th 03 08:05 AM
Warszaw Pact War Plans ( The Effects of a Global Thermonuclear War ...) Matt Wiser Military Aviation 0 December 7th 03 08:20 PM
please stop bashing France Grantland Military Aviation 233 October 29th 03 01:23 AM
What about the AIM-54 Pheonix Missile? Flub Military Aviation 26 October 5th 03 05:34 AM
Laser simulator provides weapons training Otis Willie Military Aviation 0 August 28th 03 09:58 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 05:25 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2025 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.