Al-Qaida Leader Says They Have Briefcase Nukes

In article ,
(Dav1936531) writes:
From: (BUFDRVR)


There were reports some years ago (never confirmed AFAIK) of Soviet suitcase
nukes having disappeared from their inventory.

What "inventory"? I've seen several reports where both ex-Soviet nuclear
scientists and ex-Soviet military officials repeatedly claim there were never
any suitcase nukes in the first place. This turn coat Ledbed (is that his
name?) seems to have been rewarded hansomely for scaring the crap out of
western nations.
BUFDRVR

We had/have "suitcase" nuke demolition charges.....it seems only fair to assume
that the Soviets had/have them too.

Hardly "Suitcase Nukes". More like "Steamer Trunk Nukes" or
"Footlocker Nukes". Our smallest nuke, the Small Atomic Demolition
Munition, wasn't really amenable to being carried about like luggage.
If they have lost control of them, denying they ever existed would be a good
way to attempt to save face and to try to avoid any liability for negligent
management of their armaments should the new owners use one in a terror attack.

Which wouldn't work worth a damn if they were ever used. Over the
last 6 decades, we've become very, very, good at puling radioactive
particles out of the air, and figuring out their provenance. We can
identify the parts of teh bombs that that dust was, originally. We
can identify the origin of the pit by assaying the various levels of
impurities and such that were part of teh original metal. I wouldn't
be a damned bit surprised if we could tell what production batch the
bomb pit was from.

Let's hope Al-Qaeda is blowing smoke.

Even the Russians don't do bombast quite like the Arabs.

--
Pete Stickney
A strong conviction that something must be done is the parent of many
bad measures. -- Daniel Webster

(Peter Stickney) wrote in
:

In article ,
(Dav1936531) writes:
From: (BUFDRVR)


There were reports some years ago (never confirmed AFAIK) of Soviet
suitcase
nukes having disappeared from their inventory.

What "inventory"? I've seen several reports where both ex-Soviet
nuclear
scientists and ex-Soviet military officials repeatedly claim there
were never any suitcase nukes in the first place. This turn coat
Ledbed (is that his name?) seems to have been rewarded hansomely for
scaring the crap out of western nations.
BUFDRVR

We had/have "suitcase" nuke demolition charges.....it seems only fair
to assume that the Soviets had/have them too.

Hardly "Suitcase Nukes". More like "Steamer Trunk Nukes" or
"Footlocker Nukes". Our smallest nuke, the Small Atomic Demolition
Munition, wasn't really amenable to being carried about like luggage.
If they have lost control of them, denying they ever existed would be
a good way to attempt to save face and to try to avoid any liability
for negligent management of their armaments should the new owners use
one in a terror attack.

Which wouldn't work worth a damn if they were ever used. Over the
last 6 decades, we've become very, very, good at puling radioactive
particles out of the air, and figuring out their provenance. We can
identify the parts of teh bombs that that dust was, originally. We
can identify the origin of the pit by assaying the various levels of
impurities and such that were part of teh original metal. I wouldn't
be a damned bit surprised if we could tell what production batch the
bomb pit was from.

Let's hope Al-Qaeda is blowing smoke.

Even the Russians don't do bombast quite like the Arabs.


If a nuclear bomb can be made to fit into a 155mm projectile,surely one
could fit into a suitcase? And since 155's are loaded into some artillery
by 'hand',they would not weigh more than what a person could lift.

--
Jim Yanik
jyanik-at-kua.net

"Jim Yanik" wrote in message
.. .
(Peter Stickney) wrote in
:

In article ,
(Dav1936531) writes:
From: (BUFDRVR)


There were reports some years ago (never confirmed AFAIK) of Soviet
suitcase
nukes having disappeared from their inventory.

What "inventory"? I've seen several reports where both ex-Soviet
nuclear
scientists and ex-Soviet military officials repeatedly claim there
were never any suitcase nukes in the first place. This turn coat
Ledbed (is that his name?) seems to have been rewarded hansomely for
scaring the crap out of western nations.
BUFDRVR

We had/have "suitcase" nuke demolition charges.....it seems only fair
to assume that the Soviets had/have them too.

Hardly "Suitcase Nukes". More like "Steamer Trunk Nukes" or
"Footlocker Nukes". Our smallest nuke, the Small Atomic Demolition
Munition, wasn't really amenable to being carried about like luggage.
If they have lost control of them, denying they ever existed would be
a good way to attempt to save face and to try to avoid any liability
for negligent management of their armaments should the new owners use
one in a terror attack.

Which wouldn't work worth a damn if they were ever used. Over the
last 6 decades, we've become very, very, good at puling radioactive
particles out of the air, and figuring out their provenance. We can
identify the parts of teh bombs that that dust was, originally. We
can identify the origin of the pit by assaying the various levels of
impurities and such that were part of teh original metal. I wouldn't
be a damned bit surprised if we could tell what production batch the
bomb pit was from.

Let's hope Al-Qaeda is blowing smoke.

Even the Russians don't do bombast quite like the Arabs.


If a nuclear bomb can be made to fit into a 155mm projectile,surely one
could fit into a suitcase? And since 155's are loaded into some artillery
by 'hand',they would not weigh more than what a person could lift.

You make it 155mm or so in diameter, you have to make it *long*. And they
usually have a crew loading 155mm guns; even the regular HE rounds are sort
of heavy for one man to handle getting into position.

Brooks


--
Jim Yanik
jyanik-at-kua.net

"Kevin Brooks" wrote in
:


"Jim Yanik" wrote in message
.. .
(Peter Stickney) wrote in
:

In article ,
(Dav1936531) writes:
From: (BUFDRVR)


There were reports some years ago (never confirmed AFAIK) of
Soviet suitcase
nukes having disappeared from their inventory.

What "inventory"? I've seen several reports where both ex-Soviet
nuclear
scientists and ex-Soviet military officials repeatedly claim there
were never any suitcase nukes in the first place. This turn coat
Ledbed (is that his name?) seems to have been rewarded hansomely
for scaring the crap out of western nations.
BUFDRVR

We had/have "suitcase" nuke demolition charges.....it seems only
fair to assume that the Soviets had/have them too.

Hardly "Suitcase Nukes". More like "Steamer Trunk Nukes" or
"Footlocker Nukes". Our smallest nuke, the Small Atomic Demolition
Munition, wasn't really amenable to being carried about like
luggage.
If they have lost control of them, denying they ever existed would
be a good way to attempt to save face and to try to avoid any
liability for negligent management of their armaments should the
new owners use one in a terror attack.

Which wouldn't work worth a damn if they were ever used. Over the
last 6 decades, we've become very, very, good at puling radioactive
particles out of the air, and figuring out their provenance. We
can identify the parts of teh bombs that that dust was, originally.
We can identify the origin of the pit by assaying the various
levels of impurities and such that were part of teh original metal.
I wouldn't be a damned bit surprised if we could tell what
production batch the bomb pit was from.

Let's hope Al-Qaeda is blowing smoke.

Even the Russians don't do bombast quite like the Arabs.


If a nuclear bomb can be made to fit into a 155mm projectile,surely
one could fit into a suitcase? And since 155's are loaded into some
artillery by 'hand',they would not weigh more than what a person
could lift.

You make it 155mm or so in diameter, you have to make it *long*. And
they usually have a crew loading 155mm guns; even the regular HE
rounds are sort of heavy for one man to handle getting into position.

Brooks


--
Jim Yanik
jyanik-at-kua.net




How long is a 155mm projectile?
(not the entire cartridge,if that's whats used)
I doubt the nuclear ones are any longer than a standard 155mm projectile.
(how long is one of those?)

--
Jim Yanik
jyanik-at-kua.net

"Jim Yanik" wrote in message
.. .
"Kevin Brooks" wrote in
:


"Jim Yanik" wrote in message
.. .
(Peter Stickney) wrote in
:

In article ,
(Dav1936531) writes:
From: (BUFDRVR)


There were reports some years ago (never confirmed AFAIK) of
Soviet suitcase
nukes having disappeared from their inventory.

What "inventory"? I've seen several reports where both ex-Soviet
nuclear
scientists and ex-Soviet military officials repeatedly claim there
were never any suitcase nukes in the first place. This turn coat
Ledbed (is that his name?) seems to have been rewarded hansomely
for scaring the crap out of western nations.
BUFDRVR

We had/have "suitcase" nuke demolition charges.....it seems only
fair to assume that the Soviets had/have them too.

Hardly "Suitcase Nukes". More like "Steamer Trunk Nukes" or
"Footlocker Nukes". Our smallest nuke, the Small Atomic Demolition
Munition, wasn't really amenable to being carried about like
luggage.
If they have lost control of them, denying they ever existed would
be a good way to attempt to save face and to try to avoid any
liability for negligent management of their armaments should the
new owners use one in a terror attack.

Which wouldn't work worth a damn if they were ever used. Over the
last 6 decades, we've become very, very, good at puling radioactive
particles out of the air, and figuring out their provenance. We
can identify the parts of teh bombs that that dust was, originally.
We can identify the origin of the pit by assaying the various
levels of impurities and such that were part of teh original metal.
I wouldn't be a damned bit surprised if we could tell what
production batch the bomb pit was from.

Let's hope Al-Qaeda is blowing smoke.

Even the Russians don't do bombast quite like the Arabs.


If a nuclear bomb can be made to fit into a 155mm projectile,surely
one could fit into a suitcase? And since 155's are loaded into some
artillery by 'hand',they would not weigh more than what a person
could lift.

You make it 155mm or so in diameter, you have to make it *long*. And
they usually have a crew loading 155mm guns; even the regular HE
rounds are sort of heavy for one man to handle getting into position.

Brooks


--
Jim Yanik
jyanik-at-kua.net




How long is a 155mm projectile?
(not the entire cartridge,if that's whats used)
I doubt the nuclear ones are any longer than a standard 155mm projectile.
(how long is one of those?)

The nuclear 155mm projectiles we fielded (they have all since been retired)
were around 41 inches long, IIRC (which is a bit longer than a standard HE
projectile, again IIRC--and not as long as the Copperhead CLGP). And since
you are talking about a 155mm system, that is the projectile only--those
kind of guns use seperate propellent charges. Weight of the nuclear round
was given as 118 pounds.

Brooks


--
Jim Yanik
jyanik-at-kua.net

"Kevin Brooks" wrote in message
...

"Jim Yanik" wrote in message
.. .
"Kevin Brooks" wrote in
:


"Jim Yanik" wrote in message
.. .
(Peter Stickney) wrote in
:

In article ,
(Dav1936531) writes:
From: (BUFDRVR)


There were reports some years ago (never confirmed AFAIK) of
Soviet suitcase
nukes having disappeared from their inventory.

What "inventory"? I've seen several reports where both ex-Soviet
nuclear
scientists and ex-Soviet military officials repeatedly claim there
were never any suitcase nukes in the first place. This turn coat
Ledbed (is that his name?) seems to have been rewarded hansomely
for scaring the crap out of western nations.
BUFDRVR

We had/have "suitcase" nuke demolition charges.....it seems only
fair to assume that the Soviets had/have them too.

Hardly "Suitcase Nukes". More like "Steamer Trunk Nukes" or
"Footlocker Nukes". Our smallest nuke, the Small Atomic Demolition
Munition, wasn't really amenable to being carried about like
luggage.
If they have lost control of them, denying they ever existed would
be a good way to attempt to save face and to try to avoid any
liability for negligent management of their armaments should the
new owners use one in a terror attack.

Which wouldn't work worth a damn if they were ever used. Over the
last 6 decades, we've become very, very, good at puling radioactive
particles out of the air, and figuring out their provenance. We
can identify the parts of teh bombs that that dust was, originally.
We can identify the origin of the pit by assaying the various
levels of impurities and such that were part of teh original metal.
I wouldn't be a damned bit surprised if we could tell what
production batch the bomb pit was from.

Let's hope Al-Qaeda is blowing smoke.

Even the Russians don't do bombast quite like the Arabs.


If a nuclear bomb can be made to fit into a 155mm projectile,surely
one could fit into a suitcase? And since 155's are loaded into some
artillery by 'hand',they would not weigh more than what a person
could lift.

You make it 155mm or so in diameter, you have to make it *long*. And
they usually have a crew loading 155mm guns; even the regular HE
rounds are sort of heavy for one man to handle getting into position.

Brooks


--
Jim Yanik
jyanik-at-kua.net




How long is a 155mm projectile?
(not the entire cartridge,if that's whats used)
I doubt the nuclear ones are any longer than a standard 155mm
projectile.
(how long is one of those?)

The nuclear 155mm projectiles we fielded (they have all since been
retired)
were around 41 inches long, IIRC (which is a bit longer than a standard HE
projectile, again IIRC--and not as long as the Copperhead CLGP). And since
you are talking about a 155mm system, that is the projectile only--those
kind of guns use seperate propellent charges. Weight of the nuclear round
was given as 118 pounds.

My bad. Length was actually 33 inches, weight between 118 and 128 pounds.

Brooks


Brooks


--
Jim Yanik
jyanik-at-kua.net

From: (Peter Stickney)


Hardly "Suitcase Nukes". More like "Steamer Trunk Nukes" or
"Footlocker Nukes". Our smallest nuke, the Small Atomic Demolition
Munition, wasn't really amenable to being carried about like luggage.

Doesn't really matter how tiny (or big) the things are. If they fit in an SUV
and can be left on the street and detonated like a regular car bomb, they will
suit Al-Qaeda's purpose

I think the term "suitcase nuke" just refers to an free floating small sized
demolition munition that can be used independent from some type of delivery
system such as an aircraft or artillery piece.
Dave

"Dav1936531" wrote in message
...
From: (Peter Stickney)


Hardly "Suitcase Nukes". More like "Steamer Trunk Nukes" or
"Footlocker Nukes". Our smallest nuke, the Small Atomic Demolition
Munition, wasn't really amenable to being carried about like luggage.

Doesn't really matter how tiny (or big) the things are. If they fit in an
SUV
and can be left on the street and detonated like a regular car bomb, they
will
suit Al-Qaeda's purpose

I think the term "suitcase nuke" just refers to an free floating small
sized
demolition munition that can be used independent from some type of
delivery
system such as an aircraft or artillery piece.

No, the term "suitcase nuke" became a common (and misunderstood) term when
Alexander Lebed came out with his since-discredited claims that the GRU/KGB
had built numerous very small devices that could supposedly fit into a
briefcase/suitase size satchel and of which some number were supposedly
unaccounted for. One congressional committee even saw an extraordinary
"mockup" of this fantastic "weapon". None of this has ever panned out as
being based in real fact.

Brooks

Dave

In article ,
Kevin Brooks wrote:

"Dav1936531" wrote in message
...
From: (Peter Stickney)


Hardly "Suitcase Nukes". More like "Steamer Trunk Nukes" or
"Footlocker Nukes". Our smallest nuke, the Small Atomic Demolition
Munition, wasn't really amenable to being carried about like luggage.

Doesn't really matter how tiny (or big) the things are. If they fit in an
SUV
and can be left on the street and detonated like a regular car bomb, they
will
suit Al-Qaeda's purpose

I think the term "suitcase nuke" just refers to an free floating small
sized
demolition munition that can be used independent from some type of
delivery
system such as an aircraft or artillery piece.

No, the term "suitcase nuke" became a common (and misunderstood) term when
Alexander Lebed came out with his since-discredited claims that the GRU/KGB
had built numerous very small devices that could supposedly fit into a
briefcase/suitase size satchel and of which some number were supposedly
unaccounted for. One congressional committee even saw an extraordinary
"mockup" of this fantastic "weapon". None of this has ever panned out as
being based in real fact.


ISTR some 60's promotional literature from Picatinny Arsenal showing a
jeep-mounted recoilless rifle with a crew of two. It was pointed to
the horizon and there was a mushroom cloud. I think they talked about
yields down to 1Kt. It reminds me of the proverbial nulcear handgrenade.

What's the range of a 105 RR ?

Of course it was an artist's sketch.

The same artists are now working on sketches of nuc bunker busters.
Another bad idea IMHO.






--
Al Dykes
-----------

From: (Al Dykes)
Date: 3/22/04 2:01 PM Eastern Standard Time
Message-id:

ISTR some 60's promotional literature from Picatinny Arsenal showing a
jeep-mounted recoilless rifle with a crew of two. It was pointed to the horizon
and there was a mushroom cloud. I think they talked about yields down to 1Kt.
It reminds me of the proverbial nulcear handgrenade.

What's the range of a 105 RR ?
Of course it was an artist's sketch.

The same artists are now working on sketches of nuc bunker busters.
Another bad idea IMHO.
--
Al Dykes

The recoiless rifle set up was called the "davey crockett" and fired an actual
nuclear shell based on the W-54(? IIRC) warhead which weighed in at about 62
pounds or so. Do a google on it.
Dave