Tiny H-Bomb, is this possible?

Viewing 21 posts - 41 through 61 (of 61 total)
  • Tiny H-Bomb, is this possible?
  • Suitcase fission nuke is already a done deal and a fission/fusion bomb could fit in a dustbin.

    I always found it quite hard to picture in my mind the scale of these weapons, until i saw this image in a book i was reading.

    Proper scary.

    I recommend watching a documentary called Countdown to Zero. It’s about terrorism and Nukes.

    Premier Icon epicyclo
    Subscriber

    When those Tzar Bombas come visiting, just remember that Dave and his mates will be nicely ensconced in a deep bunker while your children fry…

    Thanks for this thread, I got all confused thinking “small” nuclear device meant the same as Chenobil reactor blast..

    Chernobyl was NOT a nuclear explosion, it was an over pressurisation followed by the core cooling water disassociating and the hydrogen flashing off. Pretty much the same as what happened at Fukushima but over a much shorter time period (in the order of a couple of seconds) and with an entire reactor filled with pressurised water as fuel.

    There was a further risk of a hydrogen explosion in the flooded basement that would have wiped the entire site out but some brave sods took one for the team and managed to open the drain valve.

    That’s a scary situation itself, not just for the missiles but for the subs that carry them.

    …every single British nuclear sub, every single one is still languishing at either Devonport or Rosyth with defuelled, but still very radioactive reactors in place because the government hasn’t budgeted for disposal.

    HMS Dreadnought has been decommissioned since 1980.

    [edit] Turns out that several are still fuelled.

    Not sure what the relevance is here unless you’re worried about someone breaking one open?

    And Tzar Bombas were never commissioned as regular weapons (nor ever detonated at full yield).

    Rorschach
    Member

    I’ve dropped a few tiny F-Bombs.

    funkrodent
    Member

    If ever a thread illustrated to the OP the value of a quick google, this is it. Really interesting stuff mind, just don’t understand why sometimes people don’t do a bit of basic research before posting on here

    Premier Icon slowoldman
    Subscriber

    But STW is Google and Wikipedia rolled into one.

    Shouldn’t they try helium fusion bombs?

    Yeah good luck with that. Maybe they’ll go that when they’re finished with a Starkiller.

    PJM1974
    Member

    Not sure what the relevance is here unless you’re worried about someone breaking one open?

    Ah, the original question related to yields from Trident missiles, but I went a little O/T after digging around and discovering that we have a lot of decommissioned subs lying around.

    Yes, I am very worried about a decommissioned nuclear sub being damaged. There is already precedent for this as the Russians have had to scuttle a sub en route to the breakers yard. The reactor, even when defueled is still radioactive enough to be a hazard if not disposed of carefully. Given that our ex-subs are stored close to populated areas, I’m very concerned indeed.

    The fact that no-one seems to have given much thought to what we do with our ex-attack subs and boomers once they’ve reached the end of their useful lives gives me grey hair. I would go so far as to say that the subs represent more of a danger to Britain in their decommissioned state than our Trident missiles do to an enemy in event of a conventional conflict.

    Premier Icon epicyclo
    Subscriber

    PJM1974 – Member
    …I am very worried about a decommissioned nuclear sub being damaged. There is already precedent for this as the Russians have had to scuttle a sub en route to the breakers yard. The reactor, even when defueled is still radioactive enough to be a hazard if not disposed of carefully. Given that our ex-subs are stored close to populated areas, I’m very concerned indeed….

    Don’t worry, they’re perfectly safe.

    And they’ll all be coming down to England in a few years time – preferably to be moored outside Westminster seeing as they are so safe. 🙂

    gwaelod
    Member

    As squirrelking points out Chernobyl was not a nuclear explosion. Bearing in mind its almost the 30th anniversary of the Chernobyl accident though it’s worth a read of a couple of wikipedia articles.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chernobyl_disaster

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Individual_involvement_in_the_Chernobyl_disaster

    PJM1974
    Member

    Chernobyl and Fukashima exploded due to a build up of pressure from a secondary fire, not by the fissile material reaching critical mass. The graphite used to moderate the reaction become too hot, caught fire and the resulting explosion blew out radioactive material.

    It’s worth reading about the Windscale fire in 1957…the air cooled (air cooled!) reactor became so hot that any water used to cool the reactor fire would release free hydrogen molecules, which would accumulate at the top of the reactor, right above flammable material and fed by a steady supply of cooling air 😯

    PJM1974
    Member

    Whoops, double post.

    Premier Icon ChrisL
    Subscriber

    I’ve got a mate who named his dog Tsar Bomba.

    Chernobyl and Fukashima exploded due to a build up of pressure from a secondary fire, not by the fissile material reaching critical mass.

    A fire from reaching critical mass would be very unfortunate since you require it to be supercritical to increase power output 😉

    Sub reactors are tricky buggers only by virtue of the fact they were built without any consideration given towards removal, Vanguard class (and newer) subs are designed to have the reactors easily removed at the end of life (in fact at least one has had its reactor replaced IIRC). Really you probably need nothing more than a dry dock to accomodate the sub and the necessary equipment to cut the area of the reactor out and enclose it (decommissioning is not my area of expertise so this is entirely speculation) before taking it away for disposal. Where it is disposed? Good question, only Finland so far have had the gumption to build a long term dry store, people here just like to stick their fingers in their ears about the whole thing.

    Premier Icon molgrips
    Subscriber

    Well it’s obvious this was not a full H bomb. Cafe Nero have just opened a branch in Pyongyang, and Kim Jong Un ordered a pasta bowl and asked them to heat it up *a bit*. The resulting fusion reaction was short lived as the plasma bolognaise was not well enough contained.

    Oh and if you’re really worried about contamination from nuclear reactors don’t look at the maps of the south coast after the Brittany coast reactors get nuked in an engagement.

    Again, look on Wikipedia for military nuclear accidents, the one where a cooling rod flashes over and blows out the top of the reactor impaling a bloke to the ceiling is particular chilling. Also look up Demon Core and tickling the dragons tail.

    That SR-1 incident is almost like for like with Chernobyl (in principle). Shame there was no info sharing in those days.

    Premier Icon T666DOM
    Subscriber

    There’s a great coffee table book about nuclear testing called 100 sun’s. Some amazing pictures of the tests. They had no idea what some of the bombs would yeil. I tested the eyes of a guy who served on a ship during the tests, he couldn’t put into words the sight of a few mega tons expldoing from close range. Didn’t enjoy the skin cancer though in his old age!

Viewing 21 posts - 41 through 61 (of 61 total)

The topic ‘Tiny H-Bomb, is this possible?’ is closed to new replies.