CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
- Apr 5, 2006
- Reaction score
This was from Congressional Testimony I posted on another thread (can't remember where I found it originally)Orionblamblam said:If it is what it certainly looks like, it's probably the end result of the desire for a 50 to 100 megaton lay-down weapon.Prior to this, though, that concept only seemed to be some hand waving in some memos, so... who knows.
I'm not sure about that, but I do know that the reason the first British nuclear test, Operation Hurricane which involved the detonation of a bomb mounted inside a ship, was to provide test data on just what would happen if a nuclear weapon was detonated aboard a ship in port (Previous tests were over ground using bombs on towers or air-bursts.).bobbymike said:Didn't Edward Teller want to put 1000 Mt bomb on a ship and sail them into Soviet ports?
Just a guess, but I imagine the sort of apocalyptic scenario that demands sending pilots off to drop something of this yield doesn't necessarily prioritize a return flight after delivery.Michel Van said:i suspect that Flashback could have be bigger in yield, but
how fast can a B-52 escape the blast radius of this monster ?
the T-95 that drop the Tsar bomb just able to escape it's blast narrowly
This could give a indication how big the yield on Flashback could be
And yet the biggest, most powerful aircraft deliverable H-bombs came equipped with parachutes specifically to slow them down and give the aircrew a chance of escape. What was wanted by many was a 50-100 megaton laydown weapon that would actually plop down onto the ground and sit there for some time (maybe up to a minute) while the plane skedaddled. Imagine going about your day and having an H-bomb crash into the town square and just sit there like a turd in the punchbowl. Wouldn't be a whole lot of point in panicking, but witnesses would do just that._Del_ said:Just a guess, but I imagine the sort of apocalyptic scenario that demands sending pilots off to drop something of this yield doesn't necessarily prioritize a return flight after delivery.
Even somebody in a Veyron with a straight, smooth road out of town wouldn't be able to get away fast enough. Now if you had a trooper with a 50 BMG (or a Javelin), maybe you could disable it.Orionblamblam said:
I don't think B83's were going to be pulled off B-52's because of parachute issues if the balloon goes up. I think the mission took priority over egress. Regardless, trying to determine yield by B-52 speed seems pretty futile, in large parts for the reasons you listed above.Obb said:And yet the biggest, most powerful aircraft deliverable H-bombs came equipped with parachutes specifically to slow them down and give the aircrew a chance of escape.
Unlikely. Just about *all* the fat, tubby H-bombs used wedge fins, such as thr B53 (the freefall, aircraft-dropped bomb that used the same "physics package" as the W53 warhead within the Titan II RV):Zootycoon said:The wedge fins (on the image in the link) look very X15;- Does this indicate a very high speed, high altitude stability requirement?
Nope. Parachute package, not rocket. Intended to:in which case the body behind the conical W41 would be a big solid fuel rocket.
[/quote]Maybe a means to test the W41 or an EMP experiment?