Thanks Quad, now I remember! I definately need to see that one eventually...That topic could easily make a good thread of its own, I love talking about the Philadelphia Experiment. ;)
Printable View
Thanks Quad, now I remember! I definately need to see that one eventually...That topic could easily make a good thread of its own, I love talking about the Philadelphia Experiment. ;)
half life of Plutonium is 250 000 years.............Quote:
the half-life for Plutonium is 20,000
Reactors do not explode, they melt down........... The China Syndrome, wherin they melt into the earth, and keep on sinking until they come out in China (US reactors, UK would probably come out by Guam ?)Quote:
Ok, you can explode a nuclear reactor. But a nuclear reactor is a HUGE device, so isn't good as a choice for terrorist.
if 1Kg pluotonium = 20 Ktons, it would mean they need 500 Kg of plutonium for the 10 Megaton device................. not realistic. The Soviet 'City Killer' was 10 Megaton+, but more bang, requires LOTS more maintenance. Also Soviet technology required a bigger bang as they couldn't guarantee accuracy within 1 mile........ US tech can now drop within 10 METERS, hence US require 'only' kiloton warheads.....Quote:
Plutonium 238 is artificially produced by bombarding a uranium isotope. 1 kg of Plutonium is about the same as 19,000 TON of explosives (depending on the text book). That's a punch!!! and 1 or 2 kg doesn't weigh very much much; we humans move larger objects around like toys. Place them at predetermined distances apart and you can sneak in the equivilent of a 10 megeton bomb and not be as easily detected. I should stop since I am giving out ideas.
tech note: for max efficiency ???????? air-burst at 5000 meters will give a 'better' kill zone than a ground burst, which is why the tech race was won and lost on delivery systems.
A ground burst will generate a lot more fall out ( irradiated particles of ground zero) but will make the initial blast zone smaller. 100's of meters instead of 1000's of meters.
I've worked in nuclear power stations, and at one time I thought I was walking along a corridor, it was a WALL, more than 2 meters thick, and this was NOT the containment wall for the reactor. As the reactor is not a Hi-rise, its not a problem to make it real heavy, And the only planes to worry about are US planes loaded for bear. Which are not on the average terrorist shopping list. Wish list maybe.Quote:
I am within 50 miles of a nuclear reactor and I think about someone flying a plane into it or causing a meltdown.
Delivery therefore is restricted to physical delivery, and ground burst, max size propably within the 'small' kiloton range.
The terrorist isn't going to have too many of these, and so they need to make maximum impact, high profile targets with (preferably) live TV coverage: Olympics ? (No one said it was ONLY the US mainland at risk, your citizens are everywhere.)
Their planning will be in the range of YEARS, and they will have been theorising over target selection / delivery / impact / end result. They have already shown that they have NO moral or ethical barrieres to concern them, as they are doing 'Gods' work ?????????
As in the article, the threat is real, and it is not going to go away, YOU (USA) have to deal with this in your own way, you have the power, do you have the will to make it different.
This is NOT a military threat, this is a terrorist threat. A distinction both subtle and perverse.
They will attack (military) but not on a battlefield (terror). To fight them requires that you engage them on their level, it also implies that you fight on their terms:
No Surrender.
No Quarter.
No Rest.
No Medals.
No Glory.
NO SECOND CHANCE...........
They only have to be lucky ONCE.
You have to be lucky ALWAYS.
1-3 RussiaQuote:
Originally posted here by cacosapo
The problem about develop wide destruction weapons is sometime your enemy will have the same weapons as you.
As USA is the only major nation in the world (speaking about army/weapons), what about USA propose that everybody destroy all nuke weapons (USA including) and revert again to regular war?
Although building an atomic bond is "easy", those guys cant make one without the proper tecnology, that inst avaliable on store next door. They can get one :
1) stealing components
2) stealing a complete bomb
3) buying a complete bomb
Options 2 and 3 are worldwide available (Russia, China, Israel, Pasquitan, India)
Pu-239 has a half-life of 24,000 yearsQuote:
Pu-241's half-life is 14.4 years.
Plutonium isotope with the shortest half-life of 20 minutes is Pu-233.
Plutonium-244, which occurs naturally, has the longest half-life of 80,000,000 years.
Pu-242 with a half-life of 373,300 years
All of the remaining radioactive isotopes have half-lifes that are less than 7,000 years. This element also has 8 meta states, though none are very stable (all have half-lives less than 1s).
The isotopes of plutonium range in atomic weight from 228.0387 u (Pu-228) to 247.074 u (Np-247). The primary decay modes before the most stable isotope, Pu-244, are spontaneous fission and alpha emission; the primary mode after is beta emission. The primary decay products before Pu-244 are uranium and neptunium isotopes (neglecting the wide range of daughter nuclei created by fission processes), and the primary products after are americium isotopes.
Fact Sheet on Plutonium
Plutonium Basics
Some of you are forgetting that chernobyl was one of the worst built Nuke Reactors ever, and that is why it caused so much damage.
If terrorists REALLY wanted to hurt the U.S. with nukes, and reallly inflict terror, all they have to do is blast a nuke at about 1000-10,000 feet and the EMP blast would knock out electronical systems EVERYWHERE in a very large radius. Think about what would happen if they located the general location of one of the backbone routers...
Check this out Tsar BombaQuote:
Originally posted here by foxyloxley if 1Kg pluotonium = 20 Ktons, it would mean they need 500 Kg of plutonium for the 10 Megaton device................. not realistic. The Soviet 'City Killer' was 10 Megaton+, but more bang, requires LOTS more maintenance. Also Soviet technology required a bigger bang as they couldn't guarantee accuracy within 1 mile........ US tech can now drop within 10 METERS, hence US require 'only' kiloton warheads.....
tech note: for max efficiency ???????? air-burst at 5000 meters will give a 'better' kill zone than a ground burst, which is why the tech race was won and lost on delivery systems.
A ground burst will generate a lot more fall out ( irradiated particles of ground zero) but will make the initial blast zone smaller. 100's of meters instead of 1000's of meters.
A dirty device derived from the Bassoon was weaponized to create the highest yield weapon the U.S. ever fielded, the 25 megaton Mk-41. The Tsar Bomba design was for a fission-fusion-fission bomb with a staggering yield of at least 100 megatons!
Ahem.... If I can deliver this beast on land because it is so small, (suitcase), what is to prevent me renting a light aircraft and detonatiing it at the appropriate height?Quote:
Delivery therefore is restricted to physical delivery, and ground burst, max size propably within the 'small' kiloton range.
The terrorist isn't going to have too many of these, and so they need to make maximum impact, high profile targets with (preferably) live TV coverage: Olympics ? (No one said it was ONLY the US mainland at risk, your citizens are everywhere.)
That aside, from a terrorist point of view a ground burst is more "enchanting". Pick the right city on the west coast or in the western midwest. Wait for the appropriate weather conditions and "bang"..... They get their instant "kill" in the thousands, (possibly hundreds of thousands), then they sit back and watch the downwind hazard zone as all the cities there are evacuated to avoid the fallout. Significantly more crippling to the USA than whacking New York and watching your fallout cloud kill fish in the north Atlantic.......
lol I was trying to keep it simple. By saying, basically it doesn't take a "super power" to create a devistating bomb. The plutonium examples I used are not the most powerful because they do things that make it more explosive, and critical mass can be achieved with "spent" reactor fuels. Not very stable stuff but someone who hacks the heads off civilians doesn't really give a **** about "stability" do they?
All they have to do take 2 masses of plutonium (239) at around 3/4 critical mass and nring them together. That's it, no fancy detonator involved just a way to bring em together. They don't even have to make it safe just shield it somehow from outside, suicide missions are a specialty.
actually proper delivery, kill factor, etc. really aren't necessary if those objectives aren't available. al-quida has stated that they possess 3 suitcase nukes. if they detonated one (even if it wasn't a suitcase nuke) in say... mayberry...killing aunt bea, andy, their descendants and barney. announce to the world that this was a warning...and they have two more to use in major cities. that would, I think, satisfy their terrorist ambitions.
What is your and everyone’s take on the plutonium that we get out of the Russian-USA disarmament program, allot is brought to the OAK Ridge nuclear facility in TN, along with barrels of Heavy Water ect... destination Yucca Mountain Project , Kerry and some scientist are making a deal out of that because of potential earthquakes at the mountain site?Quote:
Originally posted here by RoadClosed
lol I was trying to keep it simple. By saying, basically it doesn't take a "super power" to create a devistating bomb. The plutonium examples I used are not the most powerful because they do things that make it more explosive, and critical mass can be achieved with "spent" reactor fuels. Not very stable stuff but someone who hacks the heads off civilians doesn't really give a **** about "stability" do they?
All they have to do take 2 masses of plutonium (239) at around 3/4 critical mass and nring them together. That's it, no fancy detonator involved just a way to bring em together. They don't even have to make it safe just shield it somehow from outside, suicide missions are a specialty.
Oh, man, good point I forgot about that Tob1, "Russian military had lost track of more than 100 suitcase-sized nuclear bombs , any one of which could kill up to 100,000 people. "Quote:
Originally posted here by Tedob1
actually proper delivery, kill factor, etc. really aren't necessary if those objectives aren't available. al-quida has stated that they possess 3 suitcase nukes. if they detonated one (even if it wasn't a suitcase nuke) in say... mayberry...killing aunt bea, andy, their descendants and barney. announce to the world that this was a warning...and they have two more to use in major cities. that would, I think, satisfy their terrorist ambitions.
Stupid, stupid Russians and that screwed up communist government failure, like most of them.
Too right, the sooner the USA, Australia, and british governments start covertly assasinatingQuote:
To fight them requires that you engage them on their level, it also implies that you fight on their terms:
even suspected terrorists, the sooner this issue will be resolved.
They need to realize that we are a people that is powerful, and will fight with whatever means
necessary to win this battle.
Morals, principals, human rights and legitimate targets are standards and views that are only
calculated by them to inflict the most amount of damage and suffering.
They need to be provoked into making a move and showing themselves, instead of waiting for
when it's too late and we have to clean up the mess. You can't see what doesn't move, make it
move.
Of course they are in planning stage, what's going to be the next target, and will we even see it
coming? I strongly doubt that all of the cracks have been filled, and much suffering and pain is to
come before this battle settles.
The threat of nuclear attack is not impossible, but a dirty bomb would be a better choice in creating the desired affect with minimal effort obtaining the materials needed.
There's a storm brewin and it's gonna be a lot worse than we have seen so far, only time and
the lack of aggresive direct actions will tell when and how we will be once again at the mercy of
these attacks.