-
We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.
Nuclear Bomb Simulator
Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
SarcasticDwarf
Diamond Member
That would be the Tsara Bomb or something like that. IIRC, the estimates place the yield at 100-150mt, depending on the source. Also, the fallout and damage was so severe, they never tested the full bomb (they removed one or two of the stages to get it down to a smaller detonation).
KarmaPolice
Diamond Member
not like it matters....if a nuke hits everyone in the world is ******.
LordMorpheus
Diamond Member
The soviets have a 50 megaton bomb.
SarcasticDwarf
Diamond Member
IIRC, that is somewhat incorrect. The Tsar Bomba is a 100mt weapon. It is a 3-stage device. The test detonation was conducted after the Soviets had removed the third (and possibly second, depending on the source) stage of the device, reducing the explosion to 50-57mt (again, depending on source). The 100mt version has never been tested as the radioactive yield would be massive (basically, even a test could be considered an act of war based on the amount of fallout all over the planet).
Colt45
Lifer
Toastedlightly
Diamond Member
You forget about the 50 megaton bomb the Russkies made..
Damn, I was late.
giantpinkbunnyhead
Diamond Member
Hmm... the default bomb size wipes out about 1/3 of Anchorage. Lovely.
dainthomas
Lifer
The 50MT nuke hitting downtown Portland would level everthing between Hillsboro, Gresham, Vancouver, and Tualatin. Of course, the west hills would deflect the blast a little, so maybe Hillsboro would be spared.
Makes me want to move to the coast even more. At least there you only have to worry about good old fashioned tsunamis.
NOBODY has a 50MT nuke, 1 was built as a demonstraction, but a nuke that large is a huge waste of materials. The largest nukes are ~15MT, and the "optimal" size for a nuclear weapon is ~500kT. The larger a nuke is the more energy is simply wasted since most of it simply shoots up into the air creating the huge mushroom cloud. It is much more efficient in terms of materials used to use several 500kT nukes on a single target.
Also, the North Korean nuke is between .5KT and 5 KT, I think everyone should notice how much smaller a blast this would make then you standard 500kT device, or a 10MT strategic bomb.
EDIT: looking at different sites it seems the vast majority of US nukes are between 100-500kT, so that seems to be the standard size for a nuke these days. Most if not all of the largest nukes have been retired.
Also, the North Korean nuke is between .5KT and 5 KT, I think everyone should notice how much smaller a blast this would make then you standard 500kT device, or a 10MT strategic bomb.
EDIT: looking at different sites it seems the vast majority of US nukes are between 100-500kT, so that seems to be the standard size for a nuke these days. Most if not all of the largest nukes have been retired.
possible aftermaths:
23. Money paid to U.S. citizens under the Radiation Exposure and Compensation Act of 1990, as of January 13, 1998: approximately $225,000,000 (6,336 claims approved; 3,156 denied)
http://www.brook.edu/FP/PROJECTS/NUCWCOST/50.htm
radiation poisening is the beginning. the damage done by a huge bomb would cost millions of dollars to clean up.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 24K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 24K
-
-
