It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Wrabbit2000
I'd picked up on this too...and I HAD read about projects on the drawing boards in the 50's and 60's for...no kidding.. nuclear hand grenades. I never gave it much thought though, as the drawing boards were stuffed with stupid and bad ideas for nuclear technology those days.
Perhaps someone with more experience than reading a few books like me can chime in here??
Just what CAN actually be fit into a physics package this size?? The SADM or man portable atomic demolition charges the US made were man portable alright ..but MEN portable would be a better term, as it took two men to transport and assemble a charge that had the yield to erase a dam or similar strategic location...but a tennis ball??
I mean, seriously? Is it even possible to make an EMP that size? I'm thinking of effects that would carry beyond the range the tiny size suggests to make it worthwhile. This cannot possibly be an ACTUAL nuclear yield type detonation ....can it? Nothing THAT small could make a blast worth using it for ..and NOT kill the people using it..could it?edit on 23-7-2013 by Wrabbit2000 because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by jhn7537
Now, do I want the new Xbox 1 for Christmas or a nuclear tennis ball???? Santa, can't I have both???
Originally posted by GargIndia
reply to post by JiggyPotamus
Jiggy, the USA is Pakistan's biggest ally and biggest weapons supplier.
The USA sent its carrier to India's coast last time India had a major war with Pakistan.
You have no idea how terrorism works in this world.
China’s arms exports in 2008-2012 grew by 162% compared to the previous five years, with most of them — 55% — going to Pakistan.
Originally posted by neo96
Originally posted by GargIndia
reply to post by JiggyPotamus
Jiggy, the USA is Pakistan's biggest ally and biggest weapons supplier.
The USA sent its carrier to India's coast last time India had a major war with Pakistan.
You have no idea how terrorism works in this world.
Not entirely true
China’s arms exports in 2008-2012 grew by 162% compared to the previous five years, with most of them — 55% — going to Pakistan.
www.hindustantimes.com...
A nuclear artillery shell is a limited yield nuclear weapon fired from artillery.
The US has dismantled its last one in 2003.
Shortly after the development of the first atomic bombs the USA and the USSR began investigations into devices with limited yield that could be used in sub-strategic situations, even tactically. This developed into a number of short-range delivery systems and low yield warheads from the late 1950s onwards. The weapons included landmines, depth charges, torpedoes, demolition munition s and artillery shells.
US nuclear artillery
The US development resulted in a number of test weapons. The first artillery test was on May 25, 1953 at the Nevada Test Site. Fired as part of Operation Upshot-Knothole and codenamed Shot GRABLE, a 280 mm shell with a gun-type fission warhead was fired 10,000 m and detonated 160 m above the ground with an estimated yield of 15 kilotons. This was the only nuclear artillery shell ever actually fired. The shell was 1384 mm long and weighed 365 kg; it was fired from a specially built artillery piece, nicknamed "Atomic Annie", by the Artillery Test Unit of Fort Sill, Oklahoma. Around 3,200 personnel were present. The warhead was designated the W-9 and 80 were produced from 1952-53 for the T-124 shell. It was retired in 1957.
Development work continued and resulted in the W-19. A 280 mm shell, it was a linear development of the W-9. Only 80 warheads were produced and the system was retired in 1963 with the development of the W-48 warhead. The W-48 was 846 mm long and weighed 58 kg; it could be fitted in a 155 mm M-45 AFAP (artillery fired atomic projectile) and used in a more standard 155 mm howitzer. The fission warhead was a linear implosion type, consisting of a long cylinder of subcritical mass which is compressed and shaped by explosive into a supercritical sphere. The W-48 yielded just 72 tons TNT equivalent.
The W-48 went into production from 1963; and 135 examples of the Mod 0 variant were built up to 1968 when it was retired. It was replaced by the Mod 1 which was manufactured from 1965 up until 1969; 925 of this type were made. Efforts were made to update the warheads: the 203 mm W-74 was developed from around 1970, intended to have a yield of 100 tons or higher; it was cancelled in 1973. A further development program began in the 1980s: the W-82, for the XM-785 (a 155 mm shell), was intended to yield up to 2 kt with an enhanced radiation capability. Development was halted in 1983. A W-82-1 fission only type was designed but finally cancelled in 1990.
Other developments also continued. In 1958 a fusion warhead was developed and tested, the UCRL Swift. It was 622 mm long, 127 mm diameter, and weighed 43.5 kg. At its test it yielded only 190 tons; it failed to achieve fusion and only the initial fission explosion worked correctly. As well as linear implosion devices, the US developed a spherical implosion device that was very close to the theoretical limit of nuclear weapons. The Mk-54 Davy Crockett was designed to be fired from the M-388 recoilless rifle. Weighing only 23 kg, the warhead in its casing was 400 mm by 273 mm. It was first tested in October 1958 as part of Operation Hardtack and yielded 10 tons, but later developments increased that to 1 kt. 400 Mk-54 warheads were produced from 1961-65 and the last was withdrawn in 1971. The warhead was also adapted for the Mk-54 SADM ( Special Atomic Demolition Munition), a cylinder 40 cm by 60 cm and weighing 68 kg. Fired by a mechanical timer, it had a variable yield from 10 tons up to 1 kt. 300 SADMs were made and they remained in the US arsenal until 1989.
Only one type of artillery round other than the W-48 was produced in large numbers, the W-33 for use in a 203 mm shell. Around 2,000 warheads of this type were manufactured from 1957-65, each 940 mm long and weighing around 109 kg. They were fitted in the T-317 AFAP and fired from a specialised howitzer. The warhead yield was greater than the W-48 and it was made in four types, three yielding 5 to 10 kt and one 40 kt.
In 1991 the US unilaterally withdrew its nuclear artillery shells from service, and Russia responded in kind in 1992. The US removed around 1,300 nuclear shells from Europe.
Nuclear weapons Artillery
Originally posted by Wrabbit2000
I'd picked up on this too...and I HAD read about projects on the drawing boards in the 50's and 60's for...no kidding.. nuclear hand grenades. I never gave it much thought though, as the drawing boards were stuffed with stupid and bad ideas for nuclear technology those days.
Perhaps someone with more experience than reading a few books like me can chime in here??
Just what CAN actually be fit into a physics package this size?? The SADM or man portable atomic demolition charges the US made were man portable alright ..but MEN portable would be a better term, as it took two men to transport and assemble a charge that had the yield to erase a dam or similar strategic location...but a tennis ball??
I mean, seriously? Is it even possible to make an EMP that size? I'm thinking of effects that would carry beyond the range the tiny size suggests to make it worthwhile. This cannot possibly be an ACTUAL nuclear yield type detonation ....can it? Nothing THAT small could make a blast worth using it for ..and NOT kill the people using it..could it?edit on 23-7-2013 by Wrabbit2000 because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by Patriotsrevenge
reply to post by skuly
Pure BS! Israel,Russia or the U.S. maybe but Pakistan even with Chinese help could not make a nuke this small and have it worth anything. The smallest supposed Russian back pack or suite case nuke was still so large and heavy it had to be carried in a truck. Our American Davy Crockett was smaller and that was shot out of a huge cannon in a Artillery shell. Take away the shell and propellant and that is small by comparison.
If one hint of this hit the CIA or Military intelligence then they would rip Pakistan apart till they recovered every weapon. Russia would do the same because a weapon like this in Paki hands is not acceptable to anyone.
Originally posted by MuzzleBreak
By using a neutron reflector, only about 11 pounds (5 kilograms) of nearly pure or weapon's grade plutonium 239 or about 33 pounds (15 kilograms) uranium 235 is needed to achieve critical mass. That mass of Plutonium would be slightly larger than a baseball. Of course, it must be in several less-than-critical mass sizes before being imploded. It's the big shielding, imploding, and other parts that rule out hand grenade sized nuclear bombs. So ---No, they don't have such a weapon.edit on 23-7-2013 by MuzzleBreak because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by Adaluncatif
BS? Really? because it's brown people?
Originally posted by Adaluncatif
Originally posted by MuzzleBreak
By using a neutron reflector, only about 11 pounds (5 kilograms) of nearly pure or weapon's grade plutonium 239 or about 33 pounds (15 kilograms) uranium 235 is needed to achieve critical mass. That mass of Plutonium would be slightly larger than a baseball. Of course, it must be in several less-than-critical mass sizes before being imploded. It's the big shielding, imploding, and other parts that rule out hand grenade sized nuclear bombs. So ---No, they don't have such a weapon.edit on 23-7-2013 by MuzzleBreak because: (no reason given)
You are assuming that greater compression cannot be achieved. I don't know if those numbers you gave are for bare spheres or the typical mass used in nuclear weapons. If greater compression can be achieved tennis ball size doesn't seem that small. Its possible that they are using magnetic flux compression generation techniques to compress the core rather than explosive lenses or two point implosion.edit on 25-7-2013 by Adaluncatif because: grammar