North Korea claims to have hydrogen bomb for long-range missile

a reply to: dianajune

The F-22 is an air superiority fighter. It theoretically could carry air to ground weapons, but it's primary mission is to carry air to air weapons. The F-35 will eventually carry the B61-12 nuclear weapon, but it won't be certified until the 2020s, unless they accelerate it by quite a bit. Right now there are no plans to certify it before the 2020-22 time frame.

a reply to: Zaphod58

Zaph, do you know the maximum flight range of the F35b? Probably classified, but what would you say would be a reasonable number?

a reply to: charlyv

Maximum range doesn't matter, you have to go by combat radius. That's the distance they can fly out, and back, unrefueled, with a maximum weapons load. For the F-35B, it's somewhere around 470 nautical miles. The C model is 615 nautical miles, and the A model is currently somewhere around 584 nautical miles.

a reply to: Zaphod58

Thanks. Seems like refueling would have to be in the equation, but on the way back. How they accomplish that is pretty amazing.

a reply to: St Udio


earlier I wrote:

...BTW

the seismographs would register a specific signature for an H bomb ------ as a H bomb requires a lot more than a mild explosion to compress the FUSION device components to detonate... it used to take a FISSION atomic bomb to 'Trigger' the Hydrogen FUSION bomb to detonate

a H bomb would register two separate explosions a micro second apart

now, a day later, the Pop Culture News Resources have provided an informative link...as shown here:

www.sciencealert.com...

"What's The Actual Difference Between a Hydrogen Bomb And an Atomic Bomb? "

Fission vs. fusion.
KELLY DICKERSON & DAVE MOSHER, BUSINESS INSIDER
4 FEB 2017

a reply to: charlyv

Refueling is always the weak link in the Pacific theater.

Think about how absurd it is....

If a lunatic is claiming to have nuclear weapons, the first thing he'd want to do is PROVE it, to the whole world.

After all, isn't that the whole point? To puff up how powerful he has become? To scare America? Don't dare try and mess with my country, or I'll wipe out you evil Americans right off the planet?

And wouldn't everyone else want to see proof of his claim, too?

That would seem to be a little bit important, to actually KNOW if it's true, or not!

But what do we do? We look at a tremor in his country, that happened on the same day he said the nukes were tested!!!


This is 'confirmation' of him having nuclear weapons!!


Could it possibly be just another tremor? Could he blast a ton of explosives up, to cause a tremor?

Many things can cause such a tremor.


This is all a farce.

A thin-cased 100 kiloton weapon optimized for gamma ray production (or even the relatively-primitive super oralloy bomb of more than 61 years ago) detonated 250 to 300 miles above Nebraska, might destroy just about every piece of unprotected electronic equipment in the continental United States, southern Canada and northern Mexico (except for small items not connected to any external wiring). Such a weapon would also very likely knock out 70 to 100 percent of the electrical grid in this very large area. Nearly all unprotected electronic communications systems would be knocked out. In the best of circumstances, as completely unprepared for such an event as we are now, reconstruction would take at least three years if the weapon were large enough to destroy large power grid transformers.

a reply to: deviant300

This schmuck had no one looking at his phoney wonderland, could do anything he wanted and no one cared. What a great life for a crappy dictator like him.

I just ask myself why the hell would an idiot like that start shooting missiles over one of the most technologically advanced country in the world, blasting nukes near its most importan ally border and now detonating an hidrogen bomb?

What a retard.

Please kill him asap.

a reply to: turbonium1

Really I'm thinking about how absurd it is for someone to think that a country as poor as North Korea has two billion pounds of high explosive lying around to detonate to try and prove to the world they have something they don't have.

Jaden

a reply to: Masterjaden

People just don't seem to realize that if it was a simple and inexpensive to just create two billion pounds of High explosives that there would be no reason to create nuclear weapons as expensive as it is to create and design nuclear weapons it is cheaper then it is to create as many pounds of high explosives as it would take to make a similar detonation with traditional explosives.

Besides do you know how much space 2 billion pounds of high explosives takes up?

Jaden

First of all, why do you assume it requires 2 billion pounds of explosives, when nobody has ever tried it before?

But even if it DID take 2 billion pounds of explosives, it's not a problem, anyway.

This has nothing to do with being a 'rich' or 'poor' country. Germany had no money at all, after the first world war, so how could they have built the most powerful military ever known?


It's about proof, and nothing else.

A maniac spewing about having developed nuclear weapons, and makes threats about using them, would want to be PROVEN first, to be true, or false.

Think how stupid it looks -

Some maniac claims to have nuclear weapons, and everyone in media, and government, automatically assumes it's true, fact.

No need to prove that stunning claim, right?

It's confirmed by seismic data, supposedly. Nice try..


If this tremor was uniquely identified as a nuclear explosion, why didn't anyone point it out, at the time?


A maniac claims to have nuclear weapons, but cannot even show us a shred of proof!!

No problem!

a reply to: turbonium1

Thoughts such as yours might lead the North Koreans to launch an atmospheric test. There is no telling if such a test could lead to war. The Chinese did something similar to prove their capabilities. It has yet to be seen if the North will try such a stunt.

Why wouldn't they have proved it already?

Show proof of it, or if not, then it's all bs.


Done deal.

a reply to: turbonium1

They've shown the weapons themselves in photos and we've detected radiation on two occasions after their weapons test. What more proof do you need they have nuclear weapons? You're really on the fringe if you think they don't even have nukes.

originally posted by: NuclearDamocles
a reply to: turbonium1

They've shown the weapons themselves in photos and we've detected radiation on two occasions after their weapons test. What more proof do you need they have nuclear weapons? You're really on the fringe if you think they don't even have nukes.

Showing the actual event would be adequate evidence.

Anyone can say they have nukes. That is not proof.

Showing a 'bomb' that is supposed to be a nuke is not proof, either.

Detecting radiation where they say the nukes were tested in not proof, at all.


If they had nukes, they'd certainly have proven it, without a doubt. And show it over and over, too.

Who speaks about his powerful weapons, and has grandiose parades to proudly display those weapons, while never showing one single FILM that would actually PROVE how powerful he is?? Absurd.