SUBSIM Radio Room Forums

SUBSIM Radio Room Forums (https://www.subsim.com/radioroom/index.php)

- General Topics (https://www.subsim.com/radioroom/forumdisplay.php?f=175)

- - Nuclear Bombs (https://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=118599)

http://www.theonion.com/content/vide...essfully_tests

Should we be worried? Is this a new member of the axis of evil???

And for those who may feel to turn this into a serious debate....chill out and have fun for once!!! :lol:

Considering your source is a prank site, I still am shaking in my boots! :D

-S

Quote:

Originally Posted by Monica Lewinsky

http://dontcamp.com/~deputy/nobackup/Monica/goat.jpg

I don't get it, unless that's a radiation based mutated 2nd left ear. :hmm:

Bert knew just what to do

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C0K_LZDXp0I

:up::rotfl:

The Cold War era seemed a swell time!

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Avon Lady

The Cold War era seemed a swell time!

:yep:

Right. Nuclear arms for everyone. But you only get one :)

But Tchocky,

can you imagine the level of discomfort if one of those things went off in your pants pocket?!?!?:doh:

No, silly. I meant one per nation!

ahhh....

god help us if those lichtensteinians ever create a rocket to put those babies on and start exporting! But, do you think that it'll have the range to get across the border crossings??:lol:

Quote:

Originally Posted by baggygreen

ahhh....

god help us if those lichtensteinians ever create a rocket to put those babies on and start exporting! But, do you think that it'll have the range to get across the border crossings??:lol:

If they can build pocket nukes, they can probably build intercontinental pocket rockets to go with them! :p

Incase some people are lacking nuke knowledge - Too bad you can't fit enough plutonium in a pocket to set a bomb off. Smallest bomb possible will still need a suitcase of some sort. Its based on putting a particular amount of material and compressing it together to start the chain reaction. Not enough material, you only get a nice explosion, but no chain reaction.

-S

The easiest weapon to build uses a large amount (tens of kilograms) of enriched uranium. Because uranium releases neutrons at a very low rate, the weapon can use a relatively long "assembly time" to reach supercriticality. One design uses a sphere with a cylindrical hole in it, and a "gun" to fire a cylinder of uranium into that hole. Until the cylinder is inserted, both assemblies are well below critical mass, but when the cylinder is inserted, the mass rapidly rises to supercriticality. A neutron randomly released by the material during this process triggers the chain reaction. This weapon is so simple that the US used one against Nagasaki without ever testing the design. These weapons tend to be fairly large and inefficient, although the design was used in a US nuclear artillery shell.

A plutonium based weapon cannot use the "gun" approach, because plutonium releases too many neutrons, which would cause the chain reaction to start long before the mass was supercritical enough to cause a large explosion. Hence plutonium weapons require assembly by compressing a sphere or shell of plutonium very rapidly, using high velocity explosives. This neccessitates very high quality explosives, a very precise machining of all parts, and an electrical detonating system which can deliver very high energy pulses to a number of detonators with great timing precision. Hence plutonium based weapons are significantly harder to build.

http://www.tinyvital.com/Misc/nukes.htm

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Avon Lady

The Cold War era seemed a swell time!

It couldn't be more true.

Everyone was a hero without having to go to kill anyone.

And to paraphrase Eurgene Jerome in Biloxi Blues, "We liked that people liked us."