User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 7/19/2023 11:14:47 PM EST
[#1]
{Do not cheer on the nuclear destruction of American cities - Z}
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/19/2023 11:15:14 PM EST
[#2]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Tsar Bomba? Psshhh, weaksauce! Project Sundial is where it's really at! Gnomon in everyone and enjoy the very last boom anyone will ever need! Why bother with a delivery system, if it's going to render the entire Earth uninhabitable? Fuggitjustsendthebitch! Good GOD  That crazy fucker wanted to build a 10 GIGATON bomb?! I'm not even mad, that's impressive  |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/19/2023 11:17:26 PM EST
[#3]
I can't see these devices having a terrestrial application. Too big, too inefficient, etc. Though very clean for the Tsar (97% fusion yield is really close to the record), and 2kg/kt isn't that bad. Good thing the Soviets then didn't know about levitating secondaries.
Anyway, these devices likely have decent utility if we want to impart a lot of momentum on a really big rock, right this instance. Though even here, a bunch of booms one after the other is likely going to be more efficient than one biggun'. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/19/2023 11:25:22 PM EST
[#4]
{COC #7 - Do not cheer on the nuclear destruction of American cities. Warning sent - Z}
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/19/2023 11:27:22 PM EST
[#5]
{Do not cheer on the nuclear destruction of American cities - Z}
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/20/2023 12:06:39 AM EST
[#6]
My father was in the Air Force from 63-67. Was at a SAC/Air Defense Command base. His job was missile guidance on the BOMARC. But he was hip deep in the world of nukes. Wasn't allowed within four hundred miles of Vietnam because of his knowledge of them.
He spoke once of seeing a bomb under a B-52 that was America's response to Tsar Bomba. A 100 Megaton bomb to show the Russians that we could do it too. I always thought he had been either telling me a whopper or had mistaken a B41 for something much higher yield. Then I stumbled across this video:  A Secret Nuclear Bomb So Big It Didn't Fit in America's Largest Bomber Makes we wonder about the other stories he told me. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/20/2023 12:23:39 AM EST
[#7]
15 Megatons
 Castle bravo 15 Mt 1954 US B-41 (MK-41) Nuke - 25 Megatons Number Manufactured About 500 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/20/2023 12:31:31 AM EST
[#8]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Nuclear weapons in storage for 20 some odd years are no good unless serviced to renew the tritium. Tritium has a half life of about 11 years. After 20 years, only 1/4 is left so if the boosting of primary is too weak, then the warhead may go at a few kilotons instead of 400 kilotons. It's not like storing 500 lb explosive bombs. For reference, the US spends ~$31 billion annually maintaining our warheads. The entire Russian military budget pre-invasion was only $65 billion. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/20/2023 12:36:58 AM EST
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted: {Do not cheer on the nuclear destruction of American cities - Z} I wouldn't 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/20/2023 1:15:10 AM EST
[#10]
Tsar Bomb was reportedly intended as a submarine delivered device like the current Status 6/Poseidon complex.
It's likely the Russians tested it via air for development, not employment reasons. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/20/2023 1:15:50 AM EST
[#11]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Hey if you guys could drop ONE tsar bomba without any repurcutions or guilt. Where would you drop it? Drop? Nope. Shoot with instruments? Yep. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/20/2023 1:20:02 AM EST
[#12]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/20/2023 1:24:49 AM EST
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted: {Do not cheer on the nuclear destruction of American cities - Z} 1) Nuking shipyards generally is bad. 2) I have no desire to fight aids infected liberal mutants fanning out from San Francisco. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/20/2023 4:02:53 AM EST
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Could you launch an ICBM horizontally? Sure, but why would you want to? |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/20/2023 7:03:14 AM EST
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted: My father was in the Air Force from 63-67. Was at a SAC/Air Defense Command base. His job was missile guidance on the BOMARC. But he was hip deep in the world of nukes. Wasn't allowed within four hundred miles of Vietnam because of his knowledge of them. He spoke once of seeing a bomb under a B-52 that was America's response to Tsar Bomba. A 100 Megaton bomb to show the Russians that we could do it too. I always thought he had been either telling me a whopper or had mistaken a B41 for something much higher yield. Then I stumbled across this video:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BhCM-sehmMIMakes we wonder about the other stories he told me. https://theaviationgeekclub.com/the-story-of-the-b-52-stratofortress-that-carried-the-flashback-test-vehicle-the-nuclear-bomb-bigger-than-the-soviet-tsar-bomba/ Not a real bomb, but a concept that was tested at Kirkland - without any explosives or nuclear material. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/20/2023 7:06:47 AM EST
[#16]
They could probably sneak one through the southern border.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/20/2023 7:12:15 AM EST
[#17]
The Russian scientists thought it was crazy and I think the pilot that dropped it retired shortly afterwards. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/20/2023 10:07:16 AM EST
[#18]
Cheering on the deployment of nuclear weapons on American cities could be detrimental to your account. Please don't do it.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/20/2023 10:08:03 AM EST
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Cheering on the deployment of nuclear weapons on American cities could be detrimental to your account. Please don't do it. Even Memphis? The one in Tennessee, not the one south of Cairo. Well I guess it is south of Cairo, but the hot one, not the depressed one. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/20/2023 10:14:34 AM EST
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Even Memphis? The one in Tennessee, not the one south of Cairo. Well I guess it is south of Cairo, but the hot one, not the depressed one. Even though Memphis is confused about what good BBQ is, I would prefer to have them stick around. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/20/2023 10:25:22 AM EST
[#21]
I thought the Ruskies were scared the bomb was too big and reduced the yield %50....
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/20/2023 10:26:25 AM EST
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I thought the Ruskies were scared the bomb was too big and reduced the yield %50.... I think alot of the talk around the bomb was just that. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/20/2023 11:14:49 AM EST
[#23]
Not a real weapon. What would be the military or strategic value of an air dropped 50-100 MT bomb?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/20/2023 12:04:39 PM EST
[#24]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Even though Memphis is confused about what good BBQ is, I would prefer to have them stick around. Good Lord Zhukov, the BBQ is the only redeeming thing about Memphis. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/20/2023 12:29:48 PM EST
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Not a real weapon. What would be the military or strategic value of an air dropped 50-100 MT bomb? "Turn Cheyenne Mountain into Cheyenne Lake." Though the Soviets thought 25 MT would do just as well. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/20/2023 12:30:53 PM EST
[#26]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Could you launch an ICBM horizontally? 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2023 1:19:21 AM EST
[#27]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Not a real weapon. What would be the military or strategic value of an air dropped 50-100 MT bomb? It wasn't intended to be air delivered. It was intended to be a torpedo weapon according to a couple of credible reports. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2023 8:56:49 AM EST
[#28]
Quote HistoryQuoted: It wasn't intended to be air delivered. It was intended to be a torpedo weapon according to a couple of credible reports. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Not a real weapon. What would be the military or strategic value of an air dropped 50-100 MT bomb? It wasn't intended to be air delivered. It was intended to be a torpedo weapon according to a couple of credible reports. That makes it even more impractical for all kinds of reasons. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2023 9:04:23 AM EST
[#29]
Quote HistoryQuoted: It wasn't intended to be air delivered. It was intended to be a torpedo weapon according to a couple of credible reports. Can you please post a link? I would love to read about that. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2023 11:57:54 AM EST
[#30]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Could you launch an ICBM horizontally? Calling Dr. @LimaXray |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2023 12:02:02 PM EST
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Can you please post a link? I would love to read about that. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: It wasn't intended to be air delivered. It was intended to be a torpedo weapon according to a couple of credible reports. Can you please post a link? I would love to read about that. Seconded. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2023 12:14:44 PM EST
[#32]
US B-41 Nuclear Bomb Efficiency
During its operational lifetime, the B-41 was the most efficient known thermonuclear weapon in terms of yield to actual weight, with a 5.2 megatons of TNT per tonne (22 petajoules per tonne) ratio (based on a 25 Mt (100 PJ) yield). Its blast yield was 25% to 50% that of the AN602 Tsar Bomba, which delivered a blast of 50 or 100 Mt (210 or 420 PJ), depending on its own configuration as a clean or dirty bomb. However even at the Tsar Bombs theoretical maximum yield of 100 Mt (420 PJ), it would still only achieve a yield to weight ratio of ~ 3.7 megatons of TNT per tonne (15 petajoules per tonne), thus the B-41 has the highest yield to weight ratio of any weapon ever created. More 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2023 12:16:53 PM EST
[#33]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Calling Dr. @LimaXray Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Could you launch an ICBM horizontally? Calling Dr. @LimaXray Only when you're trying to do a flyby, like at an airshow. "And now, from the left, in solo formation and travelling just over 15,000 miles per hour, the Ace In the Hole and winner of the Cold War, the Minuteman III! Watch carefully as the airframe prepares for first stage separation....." |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2023 12:23:19 PM EST
[#34]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Load one in a ship full of grain in Odessa bound for the Port of NY? Do we actually import grain? |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2023 12:37:17 PM EST
[#35]
One of the little-known stories surrounding the Tsar Bomba test detonation was the US effort to surveil the test. This saw the modification of a KC-135 by the Air Force's "Big Safari" office, under the project name "SPEED LIGHT BRAVO." The aircraft was to collect data on the blast as it happened.
United States Air Force Boeing JKC-135A Stratotanker instrumentation aircraft, Speed Light Bravo, 55-3127, had flown closer to ground zero to gather data about the air burst. It was so close that its special anti-radiation paint was scorched. (55-3127 was later converted to the NKC-135A airborne laboratory configuration to support the Limited Test Ban Treaty of 1963. It was returned to tanker configuration in the 1980s. Later, 55-3127 served as a test bed aircraft for the Aeronautical Systems Division at Wright-Patterson It was retired to Davis-Monthan Air Force Base in 1992.) https://www.thisdayinaviation.com/30-october-1961/ https://greydynamics.com/big-safari-the-us-air-forces-marriage-with-private-acquisition/ |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2023 2:39:18 PM EST
[#36]
Quote HistoryQuoted: US B-41 Nuclear Bomb Efficiency During its operational lifetime, the B-41 was the most efficient known thermonuclear weapon in terms of yield to actual weight, with a 5.2 megatons of TNT per tonne (22 petajoules per tonne) ratio (based on a 25 Mt (100 PJ) yield). Its blast yield was 25% to 50% that of the AN602 Tsar Bomba, which delivered a blast of 50 or 100 Mt (210 or 420 PJ), depending on its own configuration as a clean or dirty bomb. However even at the Tsar Bombs theoretical maximum yield of 100 Mt (420 PJ), it would still only achieve a yield to weight ratio of ~ 3.7 megatons of TNT per tonne (15 petajoules per tonne), thus the B-41 has the highest yield to weight ratio of any weapon ever created. More https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DiUTcK7WsAAasxa.jpg I got my own pic.  |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2023 2:42:22 PM EST
[#37]
This is a Mk17 , which was the weaponized version of the Castle Bravo device. Picture is from 2009 when my son was about 12 (and big for his age)
 |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2023 3:01:14 PM EST
[#38]
Delivery platform wouldn't have survived a trip to CONUS, but we aren't the only potential target. It might have been more of a terror weapon to keep their lesser adversaries on or near their border from stepping too far out of line. Soviet thinking didn't revolve entirely around the US and NATO.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2023 3:21:49 PM EST
[#39]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Delivery platform wouldn't have survived a trip to CONUS, but we aren't the only potential target. It might have been more of a terror weapon to keep their lesser adversaries on or near their border from stepping too far out of line. Soviet thinking didn't revolve entirely around the US and NATO. None of this is accurate. It was never intended to be fielded. It was simply another event in the Cold War Urinary Olympics, Nuclear Arms Race division, with a side-order of science-y "hey, I wonder if we can do this..." as a bonus. Seriously. It was an ultimately successful attempt by the Russians to "out-do" the United States in nuclear weapons development. A "hold my vodka and watch this" moment as they showed everybody they had the biggest (nuclear) dick in the world. Okay, fine, but ours are more accurate and reliable.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2023 4:56:19 PM EST
[#40]
Quote HistoryQuoted: 1500? I thought Russia had 5000+ nukes. And they recently removed themselves from a treaty on no future manufacturing of new nuclear weapons. So that number will increase. They may have them, but are they actually useable? Its not like they don’t have to be maintained a d most or all of theirs were last maintained when they were still called Soviets. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2023 5:06:38 PM EST
[#41]
Quote HistoryB-53 Bunker Buster Nuke - 9 Megatons If dropped on a target it would leave an 800 ft deep crater. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2023 6:14:03 PM EST
[#42]
Quoted: That's a french nuke test Quoted: That's a pic of the French "Licorne" test at Mururoa Atoll Oh. Damn, I've been wrong all this time. I blame the internet. That picture is frequently denoted as the Tsar Bomba explosion. Poster itself just says "hydrogen bomb" in fine print. Oh well, now I know! |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2023 6:21:04 PM EST
[#43]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Username is highly appropriate to this thread.  Quote HistoryQuoted: Username is highly appropriate to this thread. Operation Castle was all about being a stepping stone to designing aircraft-deliverable hydrogen bombs, they needed to figure out how to make them smaller. Bravo was......a bit more than it was supposed to be.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2023 6:31:48 PM EST
[#44]
Quote HistoryNot a 41. B53Y1 |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2023 6:41:42 PM EST
[#45]
Quote HistoryQuoted: It wasn't intended to be air delivered. It was intended to be a torpedo weapon according to a couple of credible reports. The sub is the torpedo? |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2023 6:50:20 PM EST
[#46]
Quote HistoryQuoted: This is a Mk17 , which was the weaponized version of the Castle Bravo device. Picture is from 2009 when my son was about 12 (and big for his age) https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/38579/10796.JPG Imagined this thing landing in your front yard with its clock ticking.  B-52 B28 laydown tests |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/22/2023 3:39:50 PM EST
[#47]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Can you please post a link? I would love to read about that. IM sent. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/22/2023 4:57:44 PM EST
[#48]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The sub is the torpedo? Either it could be essentially laid like a mine off a port, or given its own delivery system to slow swim it into position. The problem the Soviets ran into was the same one we ran into, namely that the number of good ideas for nuclear delivery was rapidly outpacing the budget to build both weapons and their delivery; thus, the best options had to be chosen and everyone figured out and weaponized the SLCM and SLBM, generally within the political bounds of the respective sides (for example, interservice rivalry and Rickover's control of nuclear reactors on the US, competing nuclear design and weapons bureaus and the issues of the Soviet economy to support its massive buildup on the other.) |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/26/2023 8:33:25 PM EST
[#49]
B53 Nuclear Bomb Dismantlement
 B53 Nuclear Bomb Dismantlement The elimination of the B53 by Department of Energy's National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) is consistent with the goal President Obama announced in his April 2009 Prague speech to reduce the number of nuclear weapons. The President said, "We will reduce the role of nuclear weapons in our national security strategy, and urge others to do the same." The dismantlement of the last remaining B53 ensures that the system will never again be part of the U.S. nuclear weapons stockpile. As a key part of its national security mission, NNSA is actively responsible for safely dismantling weapons that are no longer needed, and disposing of the excess material and components. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/26/2023 8:58:44 PM EST
[#50]
It wasted a lot of materials to demonstrate prowess - It sort of worked but at a huge expense of fissile materials that could have been used in other weapons. Although that is moot as Russia planned on making lots for decades - Russia has well invested in fissile stockpiles and won't run out - Savannah river has Russian stockpiles of U-235 for a few hundred years and they have even more.
|
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
