Logs for ShadowRN and Associated Mailing Lists

From:	Erik S Jameson <esj@***.UUG.ARIZONA.EDU>
Subject:	Burning Bright Question
Date:	Wed, 16 Nov 1994 12:48:18 -0700

Message no. 1 Okay, in BB, a thermonuclear device is dropped into Chicago. My question
is this:

It says that the device is a thermonuclear device, something far more
powerfull than a normal nuclear device (they truely is a difference).
The bombs dropped on Japan were 18kiloton nuclear devices. Normal ICBMs
carry a payload of something like 14Megaton thermonuclear device. Now, I
don't know that much about physics, but wouldn't a 1kiloton thermonuclear
device have a bigger destructive radius than a 1kiloton nuclear
device? As I understand it, it would, mainly because the thermonuclear
device is much more efficient. And would this have any kind of effect on
the Buring Bright nuke dropping?

Erik, a.k.a. the Whistler

From:	The GREAT Cornholio <mruane@***.UUG.ARIZONA.EDU>
Subject:	Re: Burning Bright Question
Date:	Wed, 16 Nov 1994 15:14:26 -0700

Message no. 2 On Wed, 16 Nov 1994, Erik S Jameson wrote:

> Okay, in BB, a thermonuclear device is dropped into Chicago. My question
> is this:
>
> It says that the device is a thermonuclear device, something far more
> powerfull than a normal nuclear device (they truely is a difference).
> The bombs dropped on Japan were 18kiloton nuclear devices. Normal ICBMs
> carry a payload of something like 14Megaton thermonuclear device. Now, I
> don't know that much about physics, but wouldn't a 1kiloton thermonuclear
> device have a bigger destructive radius than a 1kiloton nuclear
> device? As I understand it, it would, mainly because the thermonuclear

The "1 kiloton" or "1 megaton" reference to an uncontrolled nuclear
reaction (or BOMB) is a comparison to the amount of explosives needed to
generate that kind of explosion. 1 kilton nuclear and 1 kiloton
thermonuclear are two different methods to generate the same amount of
destructive power. Hell, if Mad Cat had 12 blocks of C-12 and blew them
all at the same point, that would be about 25% of a 1 kilton explosion.
:-) The "primitve" nukes were a fission reaction (less energy) but the
more advanced nukes use a fission reaction sparked by a fission reaction
(fusion). Two different explosive methods. But the "x-ton" part referes
only to the yield.

Mike

From:	Thomas Hirt <kragan@***.UVIC.CA>
Subject:	Re: Burning Bright Question
Date:	Wed, 16 Nov 1994 15:36:51 PST

Message no. 3 The Whistler wrote,

>It says that the device is a thermonuclear device, something far more
>powerfull than a normal nuclear device (they truely is a difference).
>The bombs dropped on Japan were 18kiloton nuclear devices. Normal ICBMs
>carry a payload of something like 14Megaton thermonuclear device. Now, I
>don't know that much about physics, but wouldn't a 1kiloton thermonuclear
>device have a bigger destructive radius than a 1kiloton nuclear
>device? As I understand it, it would, mainly because the thermonuclear
>device is much more efficient. And would this have any kind of effect on
>the Buring Bright nuke dropping?
>

A devices explosive power is measured in kilotons of TNT.

ie. A one kiloton nuclear weapon (Fusion, ie. Thermo, or Fission, ie.
atomic) has the explosive effect of 1000 tonnes of TNT.

It doesn't matter whether it is Fusion or Fission for destructive radius,
the effects are approximately the same. (There are some differences
emission-wise though, but you said you didn't know much about physics.)

Just my thoughts,
Blackest Night
AKA Tom Hirt.

"I do believe that we are up an unsanitary tributary with insufficient means
of locomotion." Kryton, Red Dwarf

Geek Code v1.01 GM d? -p+ c++ l u e+(*) m++(---) s+/+ !n h+ f? !g w+(-) t+(-)
r++ !y

From:	Adam Getchell <acgetche@****.UCDAVIS.EDU>
Subject:	Re: Burning Bright Question
Date:	Mon, 21 Nov 1994 11:32:42 -0800

Message no. 4 On Wed, 16 Nov 1994, Erik S Jameson wrote:

> The bombs dropped on Japan were 18kiloton nuclear devices. Normal ICBMs
> carry a payload of something like 14Megaton thermonuclear device. Now, I

Minuteman II carries 3 150 kiloton warheads. MX carries 10. The
only ICBMs that carry anything close to 14 Mt is Soviet SS-20, an only a
few of them (the ones aimed at Cheyenne Mountain). Now, I don't know
which ones the Russians have dismantled, but no one routinely puts megaton
warheads on their missiles. This is mostly because 150 kt airbursts are
rather more efficient at killing cities with thermal pulse than ground
burst megaton devices. Read Samuel Glasstones book on nuclear effects.
Larger warheads are only incrementally more effective.

> don't know that much about physics, but wouldn't a 1kiloton thermonuclear
> device have a bigger destructive radius than a 1kiloton nuclear

This is like saying which weighs more, a pound of feathers or a
pound of lead. A kiloton is a unit of energy, defined as the amount of
energy released by 1,000 tons of TNT.
All "thermonuclear" devices, that is fusion bombs (since their
energy release is through nuclear fusion of light elements rather than
fission of heavy elements like uranium and plutonium) require fission
triggers to achieve the requisite density-temperature-pressure. And
depending upon the design, the fission trigger accounts for as much as
40% of the energy release. It's just that playing with tritium and gamma
reflectors allow the same destructive release in a much smaller package
than that of an atomic, or pure fission device. Also, fission devices
have a critical mass, so they can only be made so small.

> Erik, a.k.a. the Whistler

+-------------+---------------------------------------------------------------+
|Adam Getchell|acgetche@****.engr.ucdavis.edu | ez000270@*******.ucdavis.edu |
| acgetchell |"Invincibility is in oneself, vulnerability is in the opponent"|
+-------------+---------------------------------------------------------------+

Mailing List Logs for

Further Reading

Disclaimer