Power of Nuclear Weapons

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
GoodRevrnd

GoodRevrnd

Diamond Member
Dec 27, 2001
6,801
581
126
Ok... to start out I don't want any debates about Iraq, Korea, the morality of nukes, how much the US sucks, Bush is a Nazi.... you get the idea.

Exactly how powerful is the biggest nuke available today, an average nuke, and a nuke Korea would likely be able to use? I'd like to know as far as immediate area destroyed goes and fallout. Also, how many nukes would it take to 'destroy the world?' I know there was some little javascript on some PBS site that sort of told you, but it was mostly worthless. If anyone could point me to a source that'd be good too. I've done a little tinkering on google and haven't turned up anything useful yet...
 
C

CallTheFBI

Banned
Jan 22, 2003
761
0
0
There are some huge nukes. Trust me, there are enough nukes to devestate every country on Earth. In my opinion it is only a matter of time before some country in the East pops a nuke on another country over there. For instance India pops a nuke on Pakistan or Iraq pops a nuke on Israel.
 
N

notfred

Lifer
Feb 12, 2001
38,241
4
0
Originally posted by: GoodRevrnd
Originally posted by: notfred
This is not a sunset.
Click to expand...
How far away was the picture taken and how big a nuke?
Click to expand...

That was the first thermonuclear device ever detonated, in 1952. It was approxiamtely 10 megatons. As far as I know, the biggest nuke ever detonated was a 50 megaton device built by the soviets.


EDIT: these are the US 10mt bomb, not the soviet bomb.
Before and after pictures of the island chain where it was detonated. Another before shot
 
K

Kilgor

Diamond Member
Oct 10, 1999
3,292
0
0
I wonder if little bitty nukes would be bad. They couldn't be much worse than napalm or fuel air explosives. I can see all kind of uses for little itty bitty nukes in a modern war. You could get alot of bang for the buck I'd bet.
 
D

dighn

Lifer
Aug 12, 2001
22,820
4
81
Originally posted by: Kilgor
I wonder if little bitty nukes would be bad. They couldn't be much worse than napalm or fuel air explosives. I can see all kind of uses for little itty bitty nukes in a modern war. You could get alot of bang for the buck I'd bet.
Click to expand...

dont u need a critical mass for the fissionalbe materials we use today? when u get that much itll be a big blast... fusion probably doesn't that resitriction but u need a lot of energy to ignite something... besides fission bombs.... a big laser system wouldn't be portable
 
E

Eli

Super Moderator | Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
50,419
8
81
Originally posted by: Kilgor
I wonder if little bitty nukes would be bad. They couldn't be much worse than napalm or fuel air explosives. I can see all kind of uses for little itty bitty nukes in a modern war. You could get alot of bang for the buck I'd bet.
Click to expand...

Clouds of radioactive material are bad, Mmmkay?
 
G

Grasshopper27

Banned
Sep 11, 2002
7,013
1
0
Originally posted by: dighn
Originally posted by: Kilgor
I wonder if little bitty nukes would be bad. They couldn't be much worse than napalm or fuel air explosives. I can see all kind of uses for little itty bitty nukes in a modern war. You could get alot of bang for the buck I'd bet.
Click to expand...
dont u need a critical mass for the fissionalbe materials we use today? when u get that much itll be a big blast...
Click to expand...
Sigh...

No, you don't... We have nukes that have a selectable yield down to 0.3 kiloton. That is about 1/100 the power of the nukes used on Japan, or about 1%. Hardly bigger than a FAE or BLU-82.

Hopper
 
ElFenix

ElFenix

Elite Member
Super Moderator
Mar 20, 2000
102,402
8,574
126
blackened is the end
winter it will send
throwing all you see
into obscurity
death of mother earth
never a rebirth
evolution's end
never will amend
never!
 
D

dighn

Lifer
Aug 12, 2001
22,820
4
81
Originally posted by: Grasshopper27
Originally posted by: dighn
Originally posted by: Kilgor
I wonder if little bitty nukes would be bad. They couldn't be much worse than napalm or fuel air explosives. I can see all kind of uses for little itty bitty nukes in a modern war. You could get alot of bang for the buck I'd bet.
Click to expand...
dont u need a critical mass for the fissionalbe materials we use today? when u get that much itll be a big blast...
Click to expand...
Sigh...

No, you don't... We have nukes that have a selectable yield down to 0.3 kiloton. That is about 1/100 the power of the nukes used on Japan, or about 1%. Hardly bigger than a FAE or BLU-82.

Hopper
Click to expand...

i see. still the radiation would be a problem :D

fusion would be much cleaner but i dont thin kthere is a portal way of ignition thermal fusion w/o the hep of a fissoin bobm. well unless somebody says other wise.
 
D

dighn

Lifer
Aug 12, 2001
22,820
4
81
Originally posted by: Grasshopper27
Originally posted by: dighn
Originally posted by: Kilgor
I wonder if little bitty nukes would be bad. They couldn't be much worse than napalm or fuel air explosives. I can see all kind of uses for little itty bitty nukes in a modern war. You could get alot of bang for the buck I'd bet.
Click to expand...
dont u need a critical mass for the fissionalbe materials we use today? when u get that much itll be a big blast...
Click to expand...
Sigh...

No, you don't... We have nukes that have a selectable yield down to 0.3 kiloton. That is about 1/100 the power of the nukes used on Japan, or about 1%. Hardly bigger than a FAE or BLU-82.

Hopper
Click to expand...

ok i did a little search. i vastly overestimated the required critical mass and the yield :D
 
G

Grasshopper27

Banned
Sep 11, 2002
7,013
1
0
Originally posted by: Astaroth33
Originally posted by: Grasshopper27
Originally posted by: GoodRevrnd
Originally posted by: notfred
This is not a sunset.
Click to expand...
How far away was the picture taken and how big a nuke?
Click to expand...
That looks like the Mike shot, I think that was a 9 megaton blast if memory serves...

Hopper
Click to expand...
It's worth noting that this particular explosion is far, far larger than anything the North Koreans can field.
Click to expand...
That's a good point...

And very true, North Korea's nukes are maybe 1% as powerful as the Mike shot was.

Hopper
 
E

Eli

Super Moderator | Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
50,419
8
81
Originally posted by: ElFenix
blackened is the end
winter it will send
throwing all you see
into obscurity
death of mother earth
never a rebirth
evolution's end
never will amend
never!
Click to expand...


Blackened is the end
Winter it will send
Throwing all you see
Into obscurity

Death of mother Earth
Never a rebirth
Evolution's end
Never will it mend

Never!

FIRE!
To begin whipping dance of the dead
Blackened is the end
To begin whipping dance of the dead
Color our world Blackened

Blistering of Earth
Terminate its worth
Deadly nicotine
Kills what might have been

Callous frigid chill
Nothing left to kill
Never seen before
Breathing nevermore

Never!

Opposition
Contradiction
Premonition
Compromise

Agitation
Violation
Mutilation
Planet dies

Darkest color
Blistered Earth
True death of Life

Termination
Expiration
Cancellation
Human Race

Expectation
Liberation
Population
Lay to Waste

See our mother
Put to death
See our mother Die

Smouldering Decay
Take her breath away
Millions of our years
In minutes disappears

Darkening the vain
Decadence remains
All is said and done
Never is the sun

Never!

Fire!
To begin whipping dance of the dead
Blackened is the end
To begin whipping dance of the dead
Fire!
Is the outcome of hypocrisy
Darkest potency
In the exit of humanity
Color our world Blackened

Blackened

Metallica - Blackened. Live it. Learn it. Love it. :)

Awesome lyrics.
 
E

Eli

Super Moderator | Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
50,419
8
81
Originally posted by: Kilgor
Clouds of radioactive material are bad, Mmmkay?
Click to expand...

Just little itty bitty clouds though nothing major. No worse than starting your lawnmower.
Click to expand...
:Q

Last time I checked, the Internal Combustion Engine didn't run on Plutonium. :p
 
Kadarin

Kadarin

Lifer
Nov 23, 2001
44,296
16
81
Originally posted by: squirrel dog
I thought the soviets had hydrogen bombs in the 500 megaton size.
Click to expand...

"Tsar Bomba" was designed to have up to a 100 megaton yield, and is the largest yield device ever made. It was never tested at full strength; the actual yield of the test was 50-57 megatons.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom