View Single Post
  #39  
Old February 25th 04, 05:31 PM
John Schilling
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Carey Sublette" writes:

The fundamental reason why 'Ivan', the Tsar Bomba, had no relevance to the
strategic balance was that it was undeliverable against the U.S. The weight
of this bomb - 27 tonnes - was nearly equal to the Tu-95's maximum payload,
and two and a half times its normal weapon load. Range of the Tu-95 was
already marginal for attacking the U.S. even with a normal bomb load. Even
worse, since the bomb's dimensions - 2 meters wide and 8 meters long - were
larger than the bomb bay could accommodate part of the fuselage had to be
cut away, and the bomb bay doors removed. The bomb was partially recessed in
the plane, but not enclosed, with over half of it protruding in flight. A
deployed version of a Tsar Bomba carrier would of course had a bulging bomb
bay enclosure added, but this would have further reduced range from the
drag.



Wouldn't a deployed Tsar Bomba carrier have been a militarized Proton,
aka UR-500 aka 8K82? The space launch version uses only storable
propellants, can put twenty tons into low orbit with the smallest
fairing easily holding a 2 x 8 meter payload, and my references on
the space launch side claim that it was developed with the ICBM role
and the Tsar Bomba payload in mind from the start (1961).

Which was a stupid idea from the start, and so never implemented,
but rather less stupid than trying to send an overladen Bear across
the arctic.


--
*John Schilling * "Anything worth doing, *
*Member:AIAA,NRA,ACLU,SAS,LP * is worth doing for money" *
*Chief Scientist & General Partner * -13th Rule of Acquisition *
*White Elephant Research, LLC * "There is no substitute *
* for success" *
*661-951-9107 or 661-275-6795 * -58th Rule of Acquisition *