Question:
what do you know about nuclear weapons?
babyangelz
2007-08-22 12:56:03 UTC
I am doing a research paper on nuclear weapons. only 25% of the info can be from sources. What do i need to know and what do you think about it? anyone have any ideas on nuclear weapons?
Fifteen answers:
Stephen H
2007-08-29 14:41:20 UTC
What, specifically, do you WANT to know? It is a broad subject. Much of the history of the development of them has been declassified, altho certain specifics of their construction will remain so. Refine the scope of the question and re-ask, I will be happy to assist.
2007-08-22 14:09:46 UTC
Here's the Army's take on NBC training -- for casualty exercise.

http://www.cs.amedd.army.mil/simcenter/nbccts.htm



And this one is an actual basic training exercise ... news report

http://www.army.mil/-news/2007/03/15/2275-nuclear-biological-chemical-gas-chamber---my-biggest-memory-from-basic-combat-training/

(NASTY -- Been there, done that)



And of course you will need to start with the Manhattan Project.

http://www.cfo.doe.gov/me70/manhattan/index.htm



By using these sites, you actually have material you can cite for your paper.



I also recommend Richard Rhodes' books The Making of the Atom Bomb and the Dark Sun: The Making of the Hydrogen Bomb



You can also get some interesting quotes on the usage of the bombs in Japan by contacting the Truman Museum in Kansas City, Mo. They have some good "fer and agin" ones that I'm sure they'd share with you. You might be surprised at who was AGAINST the use of the bombs!



http://www.trumanlibrary.org/



Good Luck
JUAN FRAN$$$
2007-08-22 13:53:56 UTC
Everything I'm telling you has been declassified or I would not be telling you about it. I'm not giving you any classified information.

One: You can fight and win on a nuclear battlefield. That was proved in the sixties in the Nevada desert by the military holding war games in conjunction with the nuclear test.

two: There are two basic types of nuclear weapons. One is the tactical nuclear weapons as used on the battle field, much smaller often times can be fired from artillery or short range missiles. they measure in the Kilo tons (the small stuff)

Second there is the Strategic nuclear weapons like mounted on ICBM's which are designed to take out whole cities (the big stuff) they are measured in the Mega tons.

The two bombs dropped on Japan in WW II both measured in just the Kilo tons which today is considered Tactical sized nuclear weapons.

In a nuclear explosion you have three types of radiation:

Gamma rays, Beta rays, and Alpha rays.

Gamma rays are the worst of the three but they only last for a short time period during the explosion. They are what fries everything. However only exist at ground zero or clost to ground zero.

Beta rays: last for several days after the explosion. They have the pentrating power to pentrate clothes buildings etc.

Alpha rays or Alpha radiation is the longest lasting several hundreds of years. But does not have the penetrationg power of either Beta radiation or Gamma rays. As long as you take care to wash your "C" rations off before opening them and wearing protective clothing to keep the dust contaminated with Alpha off you, you can survive and fight with no ill effects from radiation.

The lastest addition to tactical weapons is the Nuetron tactical warheads. They have the advanage of not having or having very little Alpha radiation. Nor do they destroy buildings etc like a standard nuclear explosion. They're main usage is in destroying the enemy's personal not the enemy's physical faculities.

The first nuclear weapons were the "A" bomb or Atomic bomb which was based on enriched uraninum 235. And was what we call a dirty bomb today because of the amount of resdual Alpha radiation it has.

The next generation was the Hydrogen bombs which were a lot more powerful measuring in the Mega tons and didn't have near the resdual Alpha radiation associated with the "A" bombs.

The Nuetron Bombs or warheads have hardly any long term resdual radiation after the Beta radiation dissipates so is best for battle field use.

Best defenses against radiation is light colored refective clothing such as white since it will reflect the radiation meaning it will not penetrate.

Nuclear radiation has shore wave lengths approaching the wave lengths of light and as such are considered for the most part line of sight. as being like high frequency electro magnetic waves. or microwaves.

Wave length is the distance and time a wave travels which making a full 360 degree cycle. microwaves are measured in the millionths and billionths of seconds and meters or feet as compared to the speed of light which travels 300 X 10^6 meters a second or around 984 X 10^6 feet a second.



Kilo tons refers to thousands or tons of TNT when talking about nuclear weapons . Like a 500 KILO ton weapon is the equilvent of 500,000 tons of TNT.

Mega tons refers to millions of tons of TNT when talking about nuclear warheads. Like a 50 mega ton nuclear warhead will be the equilvent of 50,000,000 tons of TNT.

Hope that helps a little. A little rusty on NBC warfare and tactics.

I'll say this I would a whole lot rather fight on a Nuclear battle field than on a Chemical battle field. Chemical meaing mustard gas and nerve gas being used on the battle field.
mayben
2016-10-16 16:10:20 UTC
Iran keeps insisting it desires to get rid of Israel and could no longer step decrease back from that fact. Iran is in the back of the insurgency in Iraq, Afganistan, so it does no longer make for a great resume. i do no longer understand with the worry human beings have with the U. S. having nukes. the U. S. has the accountability to guard that is allies, on the grounds that there are interestingly no different countries keen to fill the roll, which I honestly have a concern with. Japan became a fanatical society which might have fought all the way down to the final lady and infant, so the two way those lives could have been misplaced. could you extremely see Russia with the capabiltiy of the U. S. armed forces. Russia and China killed greater human beings than the U. S. ever will and that they did no longer use nukes.
2007-08-30 10:47:03 UTC
There are two main categories of nuclear weapons, classified by their mechanism of operation: fission bombs, which break apart heavy atomic nuclei to release energy, and fusion bombs, which fuse light nuclei. Fusion bombs tend to be much more powerful. Within these nuclear weapon categories, there are slight variants: for example, cobalt bombs are surrounded by a layer of cobalt that causes much more intense radioactive fallout, and fission-boosted weapons are nuclear weapons that, despite being based on fission, exploit fusion reactions to boost their yield. Neutron bombs, or enhanced radiation weapons, are fusion weapons designed to emit intense neutron radiation, killing all life within a certain area but leaving buildings unharmed.



Most nuclear weapon variants are designed for the purpose of having a spectrum of available yields and sizes for different applications. The most fearsome nuclear weapon of all time was the Tsar Bomba, a Soviet fusion bomb with the explosive force of 50 megatons of TNT. At first it was designed to have a yield of 100 megatons, but this was scaled down due to fallout concerns. In contrast, the smallest nuclear weapons, like some tested for Operation Plumbbob at the Nevada Test Site, may have a yield as low as a mere ton of TNT, or less. The smallest nuclear weapon mass-produced for deployment was the Davy Crockett warhead, designed for infantry launch from small redeployable mortars. It was deployed in Germany to guard against a Soviet invasion of Europe.



The earliest nuclear weapon designs were modeled after small guns, which shoot a hemisphere of highly-enriched uranium into another hemisphere of the same, kickstarting a nuclear reaction and the ensuing release of heat and light in large quantities. More modern designs use implosion assemblies, where spheres of segmented uranium are surrounded by chemical explosives that all detonate simultaneously, concentrating the uranium in the center and starting a chain reaction.



It is possible to make nuclear weapons that are quite small, on the order of size of a toaster. Because extremely large nuclear weapons cause collateral damage in the form of fallout, and have reduced yields because more of the uranium is blown apart without fissioning, the military favors nuclear weapons in the small-to-medium range. More focus in put on the method of delivery. Until they were decommissioned in 2005, the most fearsome delivery method for nuclear weapons worldwide was the American LGM-118A Peacekeeper missile. It contained 10 reentry vehicles, each with a nuclear warhead 25 times more powerful than the bomb that incinerated Hiroshima. One of these could dole out destruction across a very wide swath of land.
meadow03
2007-08-29 07:34:32 UTC
What about Yucca Mountain and all the issues that go along with disposing nuclear waste? What about the moral/ethical dillema of everyone having their finger on the button?
nod
2007-08-27 12:17:29 UTC
You can't hug a child with nuclear arms



listen to the song ""if the Russians love their children too" by Sting
2007-08-22 13:09:14 UTC
the radiation from these weapons can kill long after the initial blast.some test areas from years ago are still off limits.also radioactive dust can be picked up by the prevailing winds and contaminate large areas many miles away.
azariele
2007-08-29 20:02:49 UTC
nuclear weapons are used by terrorist for mass destruction to get a widespread of body counts
2007-08-28 14:14:51 UTC
your paper should be comprised of one sentence: nuclear weapons are expensive and can kill a lot of people at one time.
2007-08-26 18:47:45 UTC
nuclear weapons are very dangerous. example: atomic bomb.
Adam H
2007-08-27 13:37:55 UTC
You might find some useful information here...
2007-08-30 12:42:12 UTC
they ruin your weekend and give you an orange Afro
2007-08-30 00:44:43 UTC
it means it explode
2007-08-22 13:06:40 UTC
A third world country is producing nuclear weapons. The country is the same that has given the

United States trouble in the past. It is Iraq. Shortly after the U.S finds this out, we are being attacked by a

nuclear strike from Iraq. U.S. cities are being destroyed one by one. We declare a full scale nuclear

retaliation against Iraq. Huge devastation occurs throughout the world as allies join into the war. Nuclear

winter starts to develop. Over half of the world’s population has been eliminated. Water and food is

contaminated from the radiation. The few survivors of the nuclear war are eating dead animals and people.

There are no hospitals available for the sick, no electricity, no hot water, and no warm clothing. The land is

barren and covered with ruble in the areas that were once called cities. The sky is painted with dark gray

clouds. Lack of sunlight causes the temperature to drop by 50 degrees. The wind picks up and is seldom

below 15 miles per hour. The !

survivors' offspring, if they are not mutated in some way, will have no schools to attend. They will grow

up like primitive people. The world is forever changed.

The Strategic Initiative would benefit the U.S. because it would deter nuclear attacks on the U.S.

The Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI) is a research and development program designed to create an

effective space-based defense against nuclear missile attack, and may provoke other nations to put the

same system into space above their own skies. The media labeled the system "Star Wars" because of the

high-tech space aspect of the system. Once nuclear missiles are launched, there is no way to stop them

once they are airborne. The system would be a layered weapon shield that could intercept large numbers of

oncoming intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs), submarine launched ballistic missiles (SLBMs), and

their warhead projectiles in any phase of flight.

The idea of stopping ballistic missiles enroute is not new. The United States and the USSR have deployed

Antiballistic Missiles (ABMs) in limited numbers. It is known, however, that such missiles can be

overwhelmed by thousands of warheads coming from many directions at once. In a nationally televised

address in March 1983, U.S. President Ronald Reagan called for the long term development of a space-

based defense system that would render nuclear missiles "impotent and obsolete.'' The result of his appeal

was SDI, with a planned spending level of $30 billion over five years. One reason for this was because it

would only take 30 minutes for a nuclear warhead to reach the U.S. after it was launched. Once the stuff of

science fiction, sophisticated missile defense systems employing satellite or ground based laser weapons,

particle beam accelerators, "smart" interceptor projectiles, and other computer integrated space

technologies may represent the next era in strategic milita!

ry doctrine and the U.S. Soviet arms competition.

As currently envisioned, the system uses a "layered" defense in which enemy missiles would come

under continuous attack from the time they are launched to just before they reach their targets, a total of

about 30 minutes. Surveillance satellites would register the heat given off by the rising missiles; satellite or

ground-based lasers would strike at the missiles during the boost phase, before they disgorge their many

warheads. X-ray or particle beam weapons would attack surviving missiles in space. A scientist working

on the project stated that "A single X-ray laser module the size of an school desk which applied this

technology could potentially shoot down the entire Soviet land based missile force, if it were to be

launched into the modules field of view." The system could be managed only by super computers whose

infinitely complex programs would have to be written by other computers. Most decisions would be taken

out of human hands.

Since 1983, space tests of many experimental SDI devices have been made. Nevertheless,

intensive studies by such organizations as the U.S. Office of Technology Assessment (OTA) and the

Federation of American Scientists (FAS) are pessimistic about the possibility of developing reliable SDI

weapons. They also question whether the Pentagon has fully understood the possible range of

countermeasures that the Soviets might take. These groups and others have expressed concern that SDI

could suffer "catastrophic failure" in wartime and that deployment and even testing violates the 1972 Anti-

Ballistic Treaty

The administration was careful to note, and scientists quickly confirmed, the technical difficulties

in the new concept. If the space defense system is feasible, it probably will employ several advanced

technologies in combination and take several decades to develop. Among the systems it might employ are

homing interceptor missiles fired from the ground or satellites, nonexplosive pellets guided by heat sensors,

ground based laser weapons aimed at space mirrors which redirect the beam toward oncoming missiles, and

low orbit satellites that generate and aim laser or particle beams at oncoming missiles. Each of these

systems might or might not be effected in several different ways. The final shape of "Star Wars" and the

stages of implementation would depend on which technologies can be achieved and when. The complexity

of tracking enemy missiles, aiming and firing at them in an integrated, multi-layered space defense system

would require a tremendous amount of computer syst!

ems.

President Reagan's call for an advanced missile defense system represented a major shift in the

four decades of nuclear strategy of deterrence based on the threat of retaliation, the principle of Mutual

Assured Destruction (MAD). The Soviet Union and domestic critics, however, reject the characterization

of "Star Wars" as defensive. Its effect, they say, would be to render Soviet retaliatory forces ineffectual

and thereby leave the USSR open to a first strike. The logical Soviet reaction would be to build up its

offensive capability even more, setting off a new arms spiral. It is widely believed in the West, however,

that the Soviet Union is developing its own space weapons system.

Negations on U.S. and Soviet central strategic systems, renamed the Strategic Arms Reduction

Talks (START) by President Ronald Reagan's administration, resumed during the summer of 1982.

Through the remainder of Reagan's presidency the two sides reached consensus on many key points,

including the desirability of 50% reductions in nuclear weapons. Among unresolved issues were exact

procedures for ensuring effective verification of any new agreement and the preferred relationship between

strategic offensive and defensive forces. The United States favored the rapid and eventual deployment of

nationwide defensive systems, as indicated by its support of the Strategic Defense Initiative. The Soviet

Union was sharply critical of SDI. They did not want the system employed because that would have meant

losing the arms race.

By 1985, the Space Shuttle was conducting missions in space for the SDI program. The 18th Shuttle

flight took place on June 17 - 24, 1985, in Discovery, with commander Daniel C. Brandenstein and a crew

of six. During this mission three communications satellites were deployed. In 1990, the public found out

that those satellites were collecting data for the SDI program. In an experiment designed by the U.S.

Defense Department, reflectors were placed in each satellite to test the ability of ground based lasers to

focus in space targets. The 39th space shuttle mission, and the eighth for Atlantis, took place from April 5 -

11, 1991, with commander Air Force Col. Steven R. Nagel and a crew of four specialists. Atlantis

deployed a $617 million Gamma Ray Observatory into orbit approximately 280 miles (450 km) above the

Earth, which was also used for SDI research. The crew logged 22 hours of spacewalking. Space shuttle

Discovery was launched on Apr. 28, 1991, and!

returned to Earth on May 6. Its military mission was concerned with collecting data for the SDI antimissile

program. The mission commander was U.S. Navy Capt. Michael L. Coats. He was assisted by a pilot and

crew of four.

The costs of SDI are so huge, any where from $100 to $200 billion, that a new, less expensive

scheme was proposed in 1988. This new scheme was called "Brilliant Pebbles," it would consist of several

thousand space based "interceptors," each independently guided by a powerful built-in computer and an

electronic eye. The interceptor would track the heat plume of the just-fired missile and steer a collision

course. However, new, "fast-burn" missiles could outwit the interceptors and possible out run them.

Because of reduced tensions with the Soviets and lower defense budgets, the Clinton administration has cut

back on funding for SDI, although tests of component systems continue and plans for some form of

deployment remain in place. During the Persian Gulf War in 1991, computer software developed under

SDI guided the Patriot missiles used with mixed success to intercept Iraqi Scud missiles.

Many experts believed the system was impractical. With the dissolution of the Soviet Union, the

signing of the START I and II treaties, and the election in 1992 of Bill Clinton as president, SDI, like many

other weapons programs, were given a lower budgetary priority. In 1993 Les Aspin announced the

abandonment of SDI and the establishment of the Ballistic Missile Defense Organization (BMDO), a less

expensive program that would make use of ground-based antimissile systems.

The SDI system was originally planned to provide a layered defense employing advanced weapons

technologies, several of which were only in a preliminary research stage. The goal was to intercept

incoming missiles in midcourse, high above the earth. The weapons required included space-based and

ground-based nuclear X-ray lasers, subatomic particle beams, and computer-guided projectiles fired by

electromagnetic rail guns, all under the central control of a supercomputer system. Supporting these

weapons would have been a network of space-based sensors and specialized mirrors for directing the laser

beams toward targets. Some of these weapons were in development, but others, particularly the laser

systems and the supercomputer control, were not certain to be attainable. The total cost of such a system

was estimated at between $100 billion and $1 trillion. Actual expenditures amounted to about $30 billion.

The initial annual budget for BMDO was 3.8 billion.

Cost was not the only controversial issue surrounding SDI. Critics of SDI, including several former

government officials, leading scientists, and some NATO members, maintained that the system—even if it

had proved workable—could have been outwitted by an enemy in many ways. Also, other nations feared

that the SDI system could have been used offensively.

SDI would be a defense and offensive weapon against nuclear missiles if it were to be fully

researched and developed; but because of defense cuts and the end of the Cold War Era, the threat of a

nuclear war with Russia is slowly becoming obsolete. Now there is a new threat, third world countries.

President Regan's plan never really fully developed because the weapons that were being asked to be

developed were unrealistic even for the technology available today.

The Strategic Defense Initiative would benefit the U.S. because it would deter nuclear attacks on the U.S.

United States military research program for developing an antiballistic missile (ABM) defense system, first

proposed by President Ronald Reagan in March 1983. The Reagan administration vigorously sought

acceptance of SDI by the United States and its North Atlantic Treaty Organization allies. As initially

described, the system would provide total U.S. protection against nuclear attack. The concept of SDI

marked a sharp break with the nuclear strategy that had been followed since the development of the

armaments race. This strategy was based on the concept of deterrence through the threat of retaliation.

More specifically, the SDI system would have contravened the ABM Treaty of 1972. For this reason and

others, the SDI proposal was attacked as a further escalation of the armaments race. With tensions raising

in the Mid-East, and the capability of making Nuclear weap!

ons, revival of SDI components is not such a bad idea. The government refuses to do this because of

budget cuts, but it is in the best interest of the human race if it is brought back into the lime light.


This content was originally posted on Y! Answers, a Q&A website that shut down in 2021.
Loading...