 |
reply posted on 2-1-2006 @ 01:16 PM by Harlequin
|
and neither do Iran - and thats the thing , these are 2 pig headed and fanatical countries involved.
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 2-1-2006 @ 01:19 PM by mad scientist
|
 Originally posted by Harlequin
binary nerve agents 
ouch thats gonna hurt (literally)
Binary nerve agents have been around for a long time. All they are is 2 chemicals which are inert but when mixed together form the nerve agent. This
is merel for safety reasons. The US developed them some time ago, such as the Bigeye bomb.
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 2-1-2006 @ 01:28 PM by mad scientist
|
Originally posted by Harlequin
no , thats not what i meant - i meant the tests for the explosives need to correctly deform the uranium
those kind of tests (and other similar staged tests)
Uranium is only used for a gun-type device like Little Boy. The Uranium is in 2 pieces and fired at high speed, one end towards the other using
explosives to form a critical mass.
A Plutonium implosion device is what you're referring to.
Interesting thing about a gun device is that a reactor doesn't have to be built to produce the fissile component. The Uranium can be enriched without
a reactor which is probably why the Iranians are pursuing that technology.
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 2-1-2006 @ 01:30 PM by Harlequin
|
erm , the bigeye bomb is just a carrier for VX gas , and isn`t the sort of `third generation` binary agent im talking about
anyway -The Bigeye Bomb will never see the light of day. That's because most of the facilities built at the Pine Bluff Arsenal for producing chemical
weapons ingredients have been dismantled allready.
AFAIK Pine Bluff is now closed.
And russia is still working to destroy its own stockpiles ahead of the April 2007 deadline.
Well at least one `arm` of the NBC trilogy is being eliminated - with the second being done as well - which just leaves nukes
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 2-1-2006 @ 01:35 PM by mad scientist
|
LIke I said, binary nerve agents have been around for decades nothing new there.
As for 3rd generation weapons  Highly unlikely, there isn't much point in today's world. What's more there is no evidence except for the word
of several generic Russian scientists.
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 2-1-2006 @ 01:37 PM by Harlequin
|
Originally posted by mad scientist
Uranium is only used for a gun-type device like Little Boy. The Uranium is in 2 pieces and fired at high speed, one end towards the other using
explosives to form a critical mass.
A Plutonium implosion device is what you're referring to.
thats not right at all - Uranium can also be used in implosion devices as well.
www.fas.org...
Implosion systems can be built using either Pu-239 or U-235 but the gun assembly only works for uranium. Implosion weapons are more difficult
to build than gun weapons, but they are also more efficient, requiring less SNM and producing larger yields. Iraq attempted to build an implosion bomb
using U-235. In contrast, North Korea chose to use 239 Pu produced in a nuclear reactor
chinese a bombs are the uranium implosion type
www.fas.org...
When China decided in 1955 to develop atomic bombs it faced a number of technological choices as to the most appropriate route to follow. At
that time China could only work on one path, and had to choose between producing Pu239 from a reactor, or developing the method of producing U235
through isotope separation. The uranium path offered two alternatives, either system, either chemical separation or physical separation. Chemical
separation of Pu235 from the mixed system of U235 and U238 would have been easier than physical separation, but the separation of plutonium and
uranium was difficult due to the high radioactivity of the Pu-U system, and the severe toxicity of plutonium. Therefore, the chosen path was the
physical separation of U235 and U238 isotopes. The implosion method of detonating an atomic bomb was considered more technically advanced, though
there were questions as to whether China was capable of producing a uranium bomb detonated by the implosion method.
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 2-1-2006 @ 01:46 PM by mad scientist
|
Ok, I misspoke, uranium implosion is still less efficient than plutonium implosion, hence why all major powers use plutonium implosion devices.
Meaning that more uranium has to be used than plutonium for an implosion weapon.
Also, modern Chinese warheads would use plutonium implosion. When they first started in teh 60's uranium was an easier option, less technologically
challenging.
[edit on 2-1-2006 by mad scientist]
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 2-1-2006 @ 01:53 PM by Harlequin
|
moot point - only 9 countries have the bomb (or 10 if you include Iran)
china is the only 1 to use uranium in there weapons (exclusivley) but NK and iran and pakistan only use fission bombs which would use uranium
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 2-1-2006 @ 02:13 PM by mad scientist
|
Originally posted by Harlequin
moot point - only 9 countries have the bomb (or 10 if you include Iran)
china is the only 1 to use uranium in there weapons (exclusivley) but NK and iran and pakistan only use fission bombs which would use uranium
China would not use uranium in their implosion weapons today, they have enough plutonium. Also, the new advanced lightweight designs demand that
plutonium be used as the critical mass is far less. A smaller critical mass means less bulk and far less weight - exactly what you need to miniaturize
a weapon for modern missiles.
Critical Masses U235 = 50 kg
P239 = 10 kg
en.wikipedia.org...(nuclear)
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 2-1-2006 @ 02:29 PM by Harlequin
|
yes that might be true - but they still use uranium in the hydrogen bombs - so they must either have ALOT of the stuff or ALOT of the stuff 
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 2-1-2006 @ 02:46 PM by mad scientist
|
They would only use uranium for the 3rd stage jacket of a thermonuclear weapon, which roughly doubles the yield of the weapon.
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 3-1-2006 @ 01:35 AM by Harlequin
|
they would also use it in the first stage fission device as well
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
|
