• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Suitcase Nukes...

skepticality

Critical Thinker
skepticality
Joined
May 24, 2005
Messages
460
Hello,

I was looking for books/links/articles on the 'skepticism' side of the true capability of Suitcase Nukes.
 
There's a little blub about them in this months National Geographic. It says a 35 lb. nuke would have the explosive power of 100 tons of TNT, flatten buildings for a few hundred yards around it, and kill 50% of the people within 1/3 mile.
 
I've heard that they're also incredibly different to keep operational for very long. (Last year's suitcase nuke is this year's expensive junk) Anybody got the facts on that?
 
Why do you wanna know that stuff for? You looking for something new to be scared about or something?
 
Since these people appear to be suicidal, they may as well use nuclear hand grenades.
 
Want some information that I can use as reference for an upcoming show. I'm not scared of them! :)

My issue is more that I need to find 'public' domain information about the issue. I used to work for the Feds doing Terrorism based information analysis. So, all my 'references' are un-usable on the air.
 
skepticality said:
Want some information that I can use as reference for an upcoming show. I'm not scared of them! :)

My issue is more that I need to find 'public' domain information about the issue. I used to work for the Feds doing Terrorism based information analysis. So, all my 'references' are un-usable on the air.
Click to expand...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suitcase_bomb

The smallest weapon that either side have addmitted to haveing is the Davy Crockett thing http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Davy_Crockett_(nuclear_device)

there is the Special Atomic Demolition Munition

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special_Atomic_Demolition_Munition

What the sovites developed in this area is alrgly a mtter of guesswork.
 
aerocontrols said:
I've heard that they're also incredibly different to keep operational for very long. (Last year's suitcase nuke is this year's expensive junk) Anybody got the facts on that?
Click to expand...


I saw a documentary awhile back about the maintenance of the US atomic stockpile. Every US nuke is inspected/repaired at least once a year. According to the documentary, the fissionable material in a warhead creates a very corrosive environment. Wiring is effected by the radiation within the device, causing it to become brittle. Even the metal "case" that forces the initial explosion to go critical changes over time, due to the exposure, and may not function properly. So, unless those old, Soviet suitcase nukes came with A BUNCH of spare parts, they're probably unusable by now. At best, they'd make a "dirty bomb" type mess, not a thermonuclear one.
 
skepticality said:
Hello,

I was looking for books/links/articles on the 'skepticism' side of the true capability of Suitcase Nukes.
Click to expand...

This post has been referred to the Office of Homeland Security. Please remain on the floor, with your hands in plain sight, until they arrive. :D
 
Try THIS for information about what's possible.

The US Army's Atomic Demolition Munition was in no sense man portable although it was certainly truck portable with a yield of about 10 kilotons (Hiroshima sized). A 155mm nuclear field artillery shell can be carried, but not easily, by two men.

Any nukes in US possession are heavily guarded and safed. Haven't a clue about any other country.

IIRichard:j2:
 
WildCat said:
There's a little blub about them in this months National Geographic. It says a 35 lb. nuke would have the explosive power of 100 tons of TNT, flatten buildings for a few hundred yards around it, and kill 50% of the people within 1/3 mile.
Click to expand...

Which is still a LOT when we´re talking about 1/3 mile of, say, Manhattan.
 
I would assume it would depend on the quality of manufacturing.

A small amount of highly pure uranium, well-formed, with a well-formed and powerful surrounding conventional explosive could probably be done. But, fortunately, the smaller, the more difficult, and the larger the technological support the society must have.


IIRC, the US notified all the potential nations that might supply (i.e. "lose") a suitcase nuke (or "lose" more conventional nukes) that should one be used against the US, the US could tell this, and there would be hell to pay...so they'd better let the US help them track these things somehow.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom