Nuclear winter

I like to add on October 23, 1961 the Soviets detonated the "Tzar Bomba" which had the power of 50 megatons. I think 55 to be exact and it created a mushroom cloud that was as high as 60km and destroyed things in a perimeter up to 100km.



Tsar Bomba (Russian for "King of the Bombs"; During its development the bomb was actually nicknamed Ivan) was the largest nuclear weapon ever detonated. It was a fusion bomb with a yield of 50 megatons, though the design was capable of approximately 100 megatons. It was not intended for actual use in warfare, however; it was developed and tested as part of the sabre-rattling between the Soviet Union and United States in the course of the Cold War. The 50-Mt test was hot enough to have induced 3rd-degree burns at 100 km, atmospheric irregularities caused blast damage up to 1000 km away; the "dirty" 100-Mt version would've laid lethal radioactivity over an enormous area. In other words, such an enormous bomb has tremendous "blow back" potential to its user, while at the same time being inefficient in radiating much of its energy out into space. Modern nuclear-weapon tactics call for multiple smaller bombs to produce more damage on the ground.

Now i like to add. With bombs like this in 1961... what about present day? 200 Megatons? More powerful than a volcano i would think.


[edit on 22-6-2004 by CoMrAdE_IvAn]

Originally posted by CoMrAdE_IvAn
I like to add on October 23, 1961 the Soviets detonated the "Tzar Bomba" which had the power of 50 megatons. I think 55 to be exact and it created a mushroom cloud that was as high as 60km and destroyed things in a perimeter up to 100km.





[edit on 22-6-2004 by CoMrAdE_IvAn]

HOLY #!!!

The atomic bomb dropped on Hiroshima is so small compared to that!


btw did anyone get killed by the Tzar bomb testing?

[edit on 22-6-2004 by gooking]

no idea dude. I heard the crew in the plane # themselves, since the explosion almost reached the Plane.

Here's a little snipit from the U.S Arms Control and Disarmament Agency:

"It has been estimated that a 10,000-megaton war with half the weapons exploding at ground level would tear up some 25 billion cubic meters of rock and soil, injecting a substantial amount of fine dust and particles into the stratosphere. This is roughly twice the volume of material blasted loose by the Indonesian volcano, Krakatoa, whose explosion in 1883 was the most powerful terrestrial event ever recorded. Sunsets around the world were noticeably reddened for several years after the Krakatoa eruption, indicating that large amounts of volcanic dust had entered the stratosphere.

Subsequent studies of large volcanic explosions, such as Mt. Agung on Bali in 1963, have raised the possibility that large-scale injection of dust into the stratosphere would reduce sunlight intensities and temperatures at the surface, while increasing the absorption of heat in the upper atmosphere.

The resultant minor changes in temperature and sunlight could affect crop production. However, no catastrophic worldwide changes have resulted from volcanic explosions, so it is doubtful that the gross injection of particulates into the stratosphere by a 10,000-megaton conflict would, by itself, lead to major global climate changes. "

To read all 17 pages of thos report go here:

www.worldwideschool.org...

Originally posted by Indy
Nuclear explosions, like volcanic eruptions have the ability to propell large quantities of dust into higher levels of the atmosphere.

Didn't you understand those links I posted, big volcanic eruptions produce huge amounts of ash, dust and pumice , they produce over thousand cubic kilometers of those.
No nuke can do that... or if you know nuke capable of making ten kilometer sized hole to earth, (and raising all that to atmosphere) then show evidences.

But what is most important is dust stays there only couple months but those aerosols couple years, of course even darkness of couple months would kill grains, but that would be nothing to compared to couple cold years.


And this is what these "planet killer" impacts cause:
www.space.com...
www.space.com...

Originally posted by WestPoint23
...and if all the nukes are detonated in one place at the same time it could split the earth in half.

Mankind doesn't have power to destroy this planet, only power to destroy or save itself.
Even combined yield of nukes couldn't make anything bigger than scratch to earth's crust.

Energy released in impacts of these "planet killers" is thousands of gigatons and they still make only small dents to earth.

www.lpl.arizona.edu...

Originally posted by CoMrAdE_IvAn
no idea dude. I heard the crew in the plane # themselves, since the explosion almost reached the Plane.

nuclearweaponarchive.org...

What was the biggest nuclear bomb that the US had or has in its arsenal?.

nuclearweaponarchive.org...


And about current nuke arsenals od countries:
www.cdi.org...&f/database/nukearsenals.cfm

According to the website 25mt was the biggest nuke the us had "officially"

Originally posted by CoMrAdE_IvAn
I like to add on October 23, 1961 the Soviets detonated the "Tzar Bomba" which had the power of 50 megatons. I think 55 to be exact and it created a mushroom cloud that was as high as 60km and destroyed things in a perimeter up to 100km.

It was not intended for actual use in warfare, however; it was developed and tested as part of the sabre-rattling between the Soviet Union and United States in the course of the Cold War. The 50-Mt test was hot enough to have induced 3rd-degree burns at 100 km, atmospheric irregularities caused blast damage up to 1000 km away; the "dirty" 100-Mt version would've laid lethal radioactivity over an enormous area. In other words, such an enormous bomb has tremendous "blow back" potential to its user, while at the same time being inefficient in radiating much of its energy out into space. Modern nuclear-weapon tactics call for multiple smaller bombs to produce more damage on the ground.

Now i like to add. With bombs like this in 1961... what about present day? 200 Megatons? More powerful than a volcano i would think.


[edit on 22-6-2004 by CoMrAdE_IvAn]

The 50 Megaton bomb, as well as the very large US coutnerparts were never deployed. Strategically, there is no need for such a weapon and because of their size they are very hard to deliver.

It is MUCH better to have, for example, a (realatively smaller) Peackeeper ICBM with 10 475 Kiloton warheads than one (larger and much more expensive) Titan II with 1 9 Megaton warhead. In fact, for the throw weight required with the massive 9 megaton warhead (just imagine trying to launch a 50 megaton warhead), you could easily deliver 15 or 20 300-500 kiloton warheads.

In short - the current weapons that would be used by the US and Russia are much smaller than it is technically possible to make - or even that have been made in the past. You did note that in your own post it said " It was not intended for actual use in warfare, however; it was developed and tested as part of the sabre-rattling between the Soviet Union and United States in the course of the Cold War" ....

thats true smaller weapons are cheaper faster you can have more numbers of them insted of relying on just one

The USSR made tons more nethertheless and more powerful bombs. At USSR times they had 20,000 nukes compared to US 10,000. Their philosophy was that if you have a giant yield of damage then there is no need to worry about hitting your target directly.

well 20.000 or 10.000 that is still more than enough