Hiroshima/Nagasaki vs conventional B-17 bombing

On Sat, 20 Mar 2004 01:23:21 -0500, "zxcv" wrote:

Since the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombs were about 10 kilotons and a B-17 had
a normal bomb load of about 3 tons and I have heard of a formation of 1300
B-17's on a bomb run that would equal around 4 kilotons (3 x 1300 = 3900)
would the devastation be the same as a small A-bomb? or is there some
lessening effect because of the spread of much smaller bombs?


The effects of 1300 B-17s over a relatively wide area would spread the
destruction further. What an atomic bomb does that is so effective is
due to having all xxx kilotons go off at the same time and the same
place creating an enormous shockwave and wall of intense heat.

To put this in perspective, think of the bombs as hailstones. If I
have a hailstorm for 30 minutes with pea sized hail over, say a 2 acre
area and that hail had the equivalent water to 1/8 inch of rain, it
would cause a great deal of damage. But imagine the damage if there
were just one hailstone that weight 7000 lbs dropping from the sky.
Not nearly as much damage in most of the area, but where it hit, wow!

This, of course, is not an entirely fair analogy, since our bombing in
Japanese cities was designed to start firestorms, which did much more
damage and killed many more people than the bombs that started them.
----------------------
Mike Willey