The Worlds Biggest Nuke

Does anyone know what the worlds biggest nuke is/was?

Didn't the Russians create the worlds biggest nuke? a 300 Megaton bomb that created a ditch 12 km's down and 300km's across?

Russian have designed, build and exploded the biggest weapon ever.

How ever the first design was 'only' to 100 Mega Ton device..

And the actual weapon used in the test(s) had to be down scaled so it could be air dropped from TU-95..

And when it (the down scaled design..) exploded it had a yield of 50-75 Mega Tons.



Now..

Do you belive me?

Or do i have to get you the facts on a golden plate?

There was a thread about that some time ago. The biggest nuke was supposed to be a weapon of 100 Megatons but it weighed 27 metric tons - not the weapon to put in your ICBM. Extremely big nukes are inefficient and do not cause the damage most people think they do. It is more efficient to use several smaller weapons. Here is an interesting link of the subject:

www.geocities.com...

Notice that the heavy damage radius of a 100 Megaton bomb is 19.807 km (ground burst) while the heavy damage radius of a 10 Megaton bomb is 9.193 km (ground burst). You can study the table and see that the square area destroyed by kiloton yield goes up as yield size goes down. Hence you wipe out more territory by dropping ten 100 kiloton bombs than by dropping 1 megaton bomb.

The Soviets detonated the 'Tsar' bomb with a yield of 52 Mt. This was a scaled down version of a 100 Mt device demanded by Krushchev.
The bomb was actually the cleanest nuclear weapon ever detonated because the 3rd stage had been replaced with lead instead of U-238 ( which would have given it's 100 MT yield ).

Myes.. I found this page about the monster.
Nice bomb.. isnt it?
Tsar Bomba.

I recall saying that before, although it wasnt Russia, it was the US, and dont bother saying it doesnt exist, as its been dismantled and put in a museum and i've seen the pictures.

I remember reading somewhere that the bomb was so big that 80 miles from ground zero it could knock over an fully loaded semi.

Nerd you don't know what you're talking about,the US didn't bother trying to make bigger bombs than the Soviets. The US had nothing close to the Tsar Bomb. Stop talking BS.

Huge nukes aren't as effective as they seem.

What's more effective as a weapon are a bunch of smaller nukes, that add up to the explosive tonnage of a really big one. They disperse over a much larger area, creating a enormous area of destruction.

A single nuke is only capable of doing so much damage in a certain area.

Looks like it was Russia and heres the link to the 100 Megaton Monster.

www.atomicmuseum.com...

today they don't test it reallife they do it with computersimulations so it might be that they have an even more powerfull device constructed.

I've seen the #ing thing.

I see times haven't changed... your still a #ing moron .

If you want to be picky, theres photo's of kennedy at a base in Florida where he's standing next to missiles, he asks the base controller what they are, thinking they're sams, and the controller informs them that they're 100mt warheads pointed at cuba.

Nerdling, could you please post a link to those pictures of Kennedy?

I'm afraid i saw it as a segment on the discovery channel during a kennedy conspiracy show, i shall try and look them out though, its very close to his death, i'm sure its within the last couple of weeks.

Well, I haven't heard about the 300 Megaton Nuke before. But, I suppose that it could have happened...if they build such a weapon, then why waste it on the ground?

Well, I'll see if I can find any information on that for you...if your interested in it.

Well, there actually is a practical limit to how large a nuclear weapon should be. The larger you get, the more fissile material you waste in the explosion.
Not all of the fuel is used anyways.........I think I read somewhere that the bomb dropped on hiroshima only had an efficiency of about 10%
The reaction happens so fast that a lot of the fuel is just blown up, not having time to participate in the actual nuclear chain.
Therefore, you have to add exponentially more and more nuclear fuel the larger you want the bomb to be, and considering how damn expensive and difficult to manufacture the stuff is, this is not very cost effective.

Oh, and yes, Russia did detonate the largest nuclear device. I can say that much.
Not saying that they (or we) haven't built a much larger one since then, but never detonated. The B-61 is about 70 times more powerful than the hiroshima bomb, but its a baby compared to the others.

Read my collaborative fiction and you'll find out

I made a post with a pic and link about this in another thread here at ATS. This question has come up a few times in the past...

Link to other thread...
www.abovetopsecret.com...

The largest American weapon was the Mk 41 which had a yield of approx. 24 Mt. The General speaking to Kennedy was either using hyperbole or refering to 50 Mace missles with 2 Mt. warheads each which would have been one of the weapons contemporary to the missle crisis. The Russia Tsar bomba was the largest deliverable device. There may have been larger nuclear charges in the "Atoms for Peace" program but they were not weapons.