 sj |
||
|
||
BS: 2 Kiloton 'Safe' Nuclear Explosion?!?
|
|
|
|||||||
|
BS: 2 Kiloton 'Safe' Nuclear Explosion?!? |
Share Thread
|
||||||
|
Subject: BS: 2 Kiloton 'Safe' Nuclear Explosion?!? From: Jack the Sailor Date: 18 Jul 12 - 04:44 PM Something I didn't realize was possible. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 2 Kiloton 'Safe' Nuclear Explosion?!? From: Rapparee Date: 18 Jul 12 - 05:57 PM Happens all the time with a fusion deal -- the Sun. But the physics of that movie make it accurate, but I wouldn't have wanted to be one of the guys underneath. They were, essentially, 3.5 miles away from the explosion. I just wonder why you'd need a nuclear-tipped air-to-air missile. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 2 Kiloton 'Safe' Nuclear Explosion?!? From: Jack the Sailor Date: 18 Jul 12 - 06:17 PM "I just wonder why you'd need a nuclear-tipped air-to-air missile. " When you are trying to stop and airplane or missile carrying multiple multi-megaton weapons? I'm not saying it is advisable of course. Those 6 guys seem in much better shape than they would have been for a Hydrogen bomb. Dr. Strangelove had the Russians try to stop Slim Picken's 52 with an air to air nuke. Almost got them too! Of course close only counts in horse shoes and H-bombs. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 2 Kiloton 'Safe' Nuclear Explosion?!? From: artbrooks Date: 18 Jul 12 - 06:45 PM I am a service officer for the DAV, and one of the issues we deal with regularly is veterans who are claiming disability compensation for various cancers as a result of exposure to radiation during the nuclear test era. The VA rarely contests these claims if (1) the veteran has one of the cancers known to be sometimes caused by radiation exposure and (2) there is any significant evidence that the vet was anywhere near a test site. I can't help but wonder if any of these gentlemen had any of these cancers, and if that caused or hastened their deaths. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 2 Kiloton 'Safe' Nuclear Explosion?!? From: Rapparee Date: 18 Jul 12 - 07:52 PM A 2KT blast 3.5 miles away (straight up) with nothing between them and the blast would produce an overpressure on the ground of less than 0.1 psi (The Effects of Nuclear Weapons, DA PAM 39-3, 1962) or a wind speed of less than 38 mph (CDC figures). I'd suspect a suction effect from the ground upwards (the "stem" of the mushroon) but it wouldn't be very great. Ain't saying nothing about radiation, but all SORTS of that had to be around...alpha, beta, gamma, EMP.... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 2 Kiloton 'Safe' Nuclear Explosion?!? From: Rapparee Date: 18 Jul 12 - 07:59 PM A plain old ordinary air-to-air or surface-to-air can knock down a plane. Lock-on, fire, wait, BOOM! Heat-seeking or radar guided at that time period. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 2 Kiloton 'Safe' Nuclear Explosion?!? From: Jack the Sailor Date: 18 Jul 12 - 08:42 PM I'm not saying it was a good idea Rap. I'm saying why they were testing them. Also the odds of heat seeker taking out a ballistic missile would be greater for the nuke. On a complete miss, the EMP could possibly tale out the guidance on the missile or trigger on the bomb. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 2 Kiloton 'Safe' Nuclear Explosion?!? From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 19 Jul 12 - 02:58 AM The only radiation they would receive would be a burst of gamma from the detonation. The fallout would have been carried away from them by the time it settled from 3 miles up. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 2 Kiloton 'Safe' Nuclear Explosion?!? From: Rapparee Date: 19 Jul 12 - 10:06 AM Isn't it the gamma rays that cause mutations and superheroes like the The Mighty Hulk and Spiderman? |
