It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Estimated time of Nuclear Attack

page: 1
<<   2 >>

log in


posted on Jul, 20 2005 @ 12:52 AM
Estimates from several experts claim that its almost certain that in the next decade there will be a terrorist attack with a nuclear weapon on us soil. I believe this information due to the fact that the knowledge and expertise on nuclear fisson and weapons is becoming more and more accessible. I think that by the year 2020 there will have been an attack with a small nuke that would only have an output of about 15 k. tons- i believe that a terrorists group will NOT attain a weapon that has already been built, but i believe that they will create a grude gun-type nuclear weapon that will cause massive casualties in a concentrated area. But i hope and dream that the terrorists will not be able to create or obtain a nuclear weapon with a Megaton or > nuclear firepower. This is only my prediction which also follows most fortellings that many prominent nuclear scientists make.

posted on Jul, 20 2005 @ 01:10 AM
Do you have any links to prove what these so-called experts say? Thanks.

posted on Jul, 20 2005 @ 01:13 AM
technologically likely.

A megaton class weapon requires a full thermonuclear secondary. There is no possible way that a terrorist organization could engineer one on the first try.

The difference between a nuclear weapon with a boosted implosion core and a thermonuclear secondary, especially a modern one on a compact weapon, and a gun-type U-235 weapon (as used in Hiroshima) is almost as big as a 747 versus the Wright Bros' flyer.

Even still gun-type weapon would require some significant engineering ability, and most importantly a substantial amount of good quality U-235. Since it would be a simple design, ti would need substantially more fissile material than is commonly quoted as the minimum for a nuclear weapon, as that minimum is probably calculated assuming some measure of sophistication.

Probably 50 kg would be needed. That's not that big (Uranium is very dense) but still substantially more than the 10-15kg commonly mentioned.

Still, I believe a terrorist organization would need help from a state-supported nuclear weapons program---but not necessarily official help. For example, some radical members of Pakistan's program---like the ones running Khan's ring---could probably help significantly on manufacturing and design.

posted on Jul, 20 2005 @ 01:15 AM
10-15ktons is NOT a small nuke by any means..

Especially if the detonation is achieved on the rooftop of a skyscraper or something..

posted on Jul, 20 2005 @ 01:23 AM
Well it isnt a small nuke, but compared to the destructive power of a common 35 megaton nuclear warhead in the arsenals of major coutries, it is small. One DOE scientists is quoted as saying that a "jack-of-all-trades" *MIGHT be able to create a nuclear bomb by himself, so no a State funded operation is not necessary. - i couldnt find the site that actually posted how to make it. (details)

posted on Jul, 20 2005 @ 05:15 AM
no one has a 35MT weapon anymore - smaller is better especially with sympathetic wave effects

anyway - who ever had a 35MT weapon? the usa? nope the largest deplyed was the 25MT mk41 , which was retired in favour of the , 9MT mk53 as used by the titan II .

posted on Jul, 20 2005 @ 05:29 AM
50MT Tsar by the Russians was the largest!

posted on Jul, 20 2005 @ 05:58 AM
it was never an operational weapon - the tsar bomba was simply too big to be effective - although im sure they would have deployed IF it became neccesary.

it was also one the cleanest weapons tested - the third stage was replaced with lead , reducing the maximum yield from around 100MT to the tested 58MT , and the overall efficiency was very high indeed!

posted on Jul, 20 2005 @ 06:05 AM
100MT weapon!!

posted on Jul, 20 2005 @ 06:15 AM
it was designed as a fission-fusion-fission weapon , for its maximum yield.

however during the only test , the third stage `fission` was replaced with lead

this reduced the overall yield by about 1/2 - but 97% of the `potential` came from fusion - and pure fusion is much cleaner (relatively of course) than fission - fission leaves alot of waste (fallout).

The US also tested a 3 stage design - the bassoon device (redwing zuni shot) , which also had a non fissable third stage - 85% of the `power` was fusion ; it was later used, in `dirty` form to develop the mk-41 , which has the highest yield of any US weapon at 25MT.

posted on Jul, 26 2005 @ 03:36 PM
The denial of nuclear technology to the Arabs is proof positive of just how far behind the West these people truly are, because if we don't give it to them, they don't ever get to have it.

They'll never develop nukes themselves, but of course someone could still give one to them.

posted on Jul, 27 2005 @ 12:00 AM
I only hope that their inferiority stunts their nuclear growth, but i seriously doubt that the technology could evade them forever.

posted on Jul, 27 2005 @ 12:16 AM
IMO, Its only a matter of time before One of our MANY enemies detonates a Nuke from within one of our own cities.

The Problem is, it would be a ground detonation. The good news is that this type of detonation would have a smaller blast radius. The REALLY BAD NEWS is that this type of detonation has MUCH HIGHER RADIATION and Fallout.

Its not a matter of if...but when.

Before 2020 sounds like a very realistic time table.

posted on Jul, 27 2005 @ 08:57 AM

Originally posted by Daedalus3
100MT weapon!!

the bigger it doesnt mean its always the better..
smaller nuke its better, u throw like 3 of them it can cost more dmg than 1 huge nuke

posted on Jul, 27 2005 @ 12:05 PM
Yea its a wave theory thing where the combined explosive waves of nuclear blast create a virtual 100% death zone for like 100 km.

posted on Jul, 27 2005 @ 12:55 PM
I could build a nuke. But I don't have the Uranium.

If I ever got my hands on some, I still wouldn't be able to actually build it tough. Or it should have been melted in the desired form already. Processing the stuff will be a problem too. I'll probably die of the radiation before I can activate it anyway.

[edit on 27-7-2005 by CrazyOrange]

posted on Jul, 27 2005 @ 01:03 PM
There is a book out called "Memorial Day' You should read. It talks of how the terrorists actually got the nuclear material from a Russian testing site. Do a google search and you will find that there is more than one area they tested at, and for everyone(bomb) that was detonated, there were those that were not or did not achieve detonation.

This material is there, and it is ungaurded. These people give there lives, so why not by radiation sickness rather than a bomb strapped to your chest. It is not a matter of if anymore, but when.

Also, a 15kt blast will level more than a few city blocks, and if in a major metro area, would casue deaths in the 100k range in the initial blast.

It is not easy, but it is not impossible either.

posted on Jul, 27 2005 @ 04:01 PM

Originally posted by esdad71
It is not easy.

not easy is an understatement

posted on Jul, 27 2005 @ 04:27 PM
A 10 or 15 MT nuclear warhead may be al Qaeda's preferred type of WMD that can be easily assembled and ready to detonate with the right technology and well trained engineers. Al Qaeda have been instructing some of its well educated members to be more proficient in nuclear science, nuclear engineering and technology in other nuclear-oriented countries like North Korea, Pakistan, Russia, South Africa, even Brazil or Canada.

Al Qaeda is a pretty well-connected network across the planet, in the financial and organizational senses.

posted on Jul, 27 2005 @ 04:47 PM
Good article warpboost. And given the age of it (2002), I'm sure they've come a way since then.

In light of that article, the main thing I'm curious about is the possibility of someone sneaking material into a city piecemeal, such small quantities that it wouldn't be really noticed by the scanners. Another possibility would be someone circumventing the usual transit routes. I mean, I don't know much about how it would really work dealing with the logistics on Manhattan Island, but I could easily imagine someone swimming or taking a small boat/jet ski out a little ways and meeting up with someone in a speed boat, who takes them most of the way to the island, and they swim the rest. Plausible, anyone who knows the area?

top topics

<<   2 >>

log in