Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

US's most powerful nuclear bomb being dismantled
Yahoo News ^ | 10/25/2011

Posted on 10/25/2011 7:35:17 AM PDT by Scythian



AMARILLO, Texas (AP) — The last of the nation's most powerful nuclear bombs — a weapon hundreds of times stronger than the bomb dropped on Hiroshima — is being disassembled nearly half a century after it was put into service at the height of the Cold War.

The final components of the B53 bomb will be broken down Tuesday at the Pantex Plant near Amarillo, the nation's only nuclear weapons assembly and disassembly facility. The completion of the dismantling program is a year ahead of schedule, according to the U.S. Department of Energy's National Nuclear Security Administration, and aligns with President Barack Obama's goal of reducing the number of nuclear weapons.

Thomas D'Agostino, the nuclear administration's chief, called the bomb's elimination a "significant milestone."

(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...


TOPICS: Front Page News; News/Current Events; US: Texas
KEYWORDS: amarillo; b53; b53bomb; bomb; nuclearbomb; nuclearweapons; pantex
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-59 last
To: Oztrich Boy
They were replaced in 1997.

So all the press hoopla about dismantling this thing is just Obama's press corpse (pun intended) trying to make people believe he is following through on a campaign promise, when in reality it was begun under the Bush admin.

41 posted on 10/25/2011 11:09:06 AM PDT by newheart (When does policy become treason?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Grizzled Bear
Do you own a firearm?

There is a fundamental difference between a weapon that propels a piece of metal at high speed in a specific direction, and a weapon which is designed to inflict fatal burns across a thousand square miles. Surely you can agree on that point, yes?

And I do own a number of firearms, but that's irrelevant.

42 posted on 10/25/2011 11:44:43 AM PDT by mvpel (Michael Pelletier)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]




Click the Pic               Thank you, JoeProBono

Gary and Harriet Leave the Reception in Their Honeymoon Shells

Follow the Exciting Adventures of Gary the Snail!


Abolish FReepathons
Go Monthly

If you sign up
A sponsor will donate $10

43 posted on 10/25/2011 11:54:50 AM PDT by TheOldLady (FReepmail me to get ON or OFF the ZOT LIGHTNING ping list)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: mvpel
Just so we're clear - a thousand square miles is about the size of the entire state of Rhode Island excluding Narragansett Bay.
44 posted on 10/25/2011 11:57:19 AM PDT by mvpel (Michael Pelletier)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: mvpel
There is a fundamental difference between a weapon that propels a piece of metal at high speed in a specific direction, and a weapon which is designed to inflict fatal burns across a thousand square miles. Surely you can agree on that point, yes?

A generation of Americans who would not have been born had their fathers taken part in a land invasion of Japan would find you immoral.

And I do own a number of firearms, but that's irrelevant.

A handgun held by a homeowner protecting his family is no more moral then the handgun used by a rapist. It's a tool, just like a nuclear weapon.

Don't you have some whales to save?

45 posted on 10/25/2011 12:09:32 PM PDT by Grizzled Bear (No More RINOs!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: mvpel; Moltke

Here’s the real deal: Tsar Bomba.

Tested on October 30th, 1961. It was planned as a 100 megaton device, however for the test, it was scaled down to 50 megatons.

The fireball reached nearly as high as the altitude of the release plane, 6.5 miles (10 km) and was seen almost 1,000 kilometres (620 mi) from ground zero. The subsequent mushroom cloud was about 64 kilometres (40 mi) high (nearly seven times the height of Mount Everest), which meant that the cloud was well inside the Mesosphere when it peaked. The base of the cloud was 40 kilometres (25 mi) wide. All buildings in the village of Severny (both wooden and brick), located 55 kilometres (34 mi) from ground zero within the Sukhoy Nos test range, were completely destroyed. In districts hundreds of kilometers from ground zero, wooden houses were destroyed, and stone ones lost their roofs, windows and doors; and radio communications were interrupted for almost one hour. One participant in the test saw a bright flash through dark goggles and felt the effects of a thermal pulse even at a distance of 270 kilometres (170 mi). The heat from the explosion could have caused third-degree burns 100 km (62 mi) away from ground zero. A shock wave was observed in the air at Dikson settlement 700 kilometres (430 mi) away; windowpanes were partially broken to distances of 900 kilometres (560 mi). Atmospheric focusing caused blast damage at even greater distances, breaking windows in Norway and Finland. The seismic shock created by the detonation was measurable even on its third passage around the Earth.[8] Its seismic body wave magnitude was about 5 to 5.25.[7] The energy yield was around 7.1 on the Richter scale but, since the bomb was detonated in air rather than underground, most of the energy was not converted to seismic waves.

Now THAT’S a bomb.


46 posted on 10/25/2011 12:33:09 PM PDT by AnAmericanAbroad (It's all bread and circuses for the future prey of the Morlocks.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Scythian
A year ahead of schedule! This has to be the first efficient government effort in history, disarmament. Obama can be efficient on some things.
47 posted on 10/25/2011 1:01:28 PM PDT by American in Israel (A wise man's heart directs him to the right, but the foolish mans heart directs him toward the left.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AnAmericanAbroad

Wow, they really nuked themselves!


48 posted on 10/25/2011 1:11:57 PM PDT by American in Israel (A wise man's heart directs him to the right, but the foolish mans heart directs him toward the left.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: lexington minuteman 1775

I am PRETTY SURE that we had at least one deployed 24 megaton bomb. See below.
B41 Y1 NGB Sep 1960 1960 1976 Jul 1976 3-stage TN, dirty 4840 ~25 500


49 posted on 10/25/2011 1:38:58 PM PDT by 2harddrive
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Grizzled Bear
A generation of Americans who would not have been born had their fathers taken part in a land invasion of Japan would find you immoral.

There is also a fundamental difference between an 80 kiloton bomb and a 9,000 kiloton bomb. The firebombing of Tokyo killed more people than either atomic bomb. Note that I said "THIS weapon" not "THESE weapons."

50 posted on 10/25/2011 2:15:59 PM PDT by mvpel (Michael Pelletier)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

Comment #51 Removed by Moderator

To: mvpel

A number of smaller nukes will wreak the same havoc.

So what’s your point? Total nuclear disarmament? Good luck convincing the Chicoms, Norks, and Imadinnerjacket, peacenik.


52 posted on 10/25/2011 3:30:57 PM PDT by Moltke (Always retaliate first.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: AnAmericanAbroad
Here’s the real deal: Tsar Bomba.

Tested on October 30th, 1961. It was planned as a 100 megaton device, however for the test, it was scaled down to 50 megatons.

~~~~~~

Now THAT’S a bomb.

Want to know the real kicker? It was to be used as a TACTICAL bomb.

It was really excessively powerful as a strategic weapon, but if the situation in Europe went nuclear, the Russian generals figured 3 or 4 would pretty much sanitise NATO forces in W Germany.

That's one wrinkle Robert Oppenheimer didn't consider when he pushed the idea of battlefield nukes in the early 50s

53 posted on 10/25/2011 4:29:15 PM PDT by Oztrich Boy (New gets old. Steampunk is always cool)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: SargeK
You are right on, Sarge. This weapon and others like it were succesfully used throughout the Cold War. They succeeded in their primary function, which was to keep the Cold War cold. Any other interpretation is insane and would have been suicidal, whereas this weapon saved innumerable innocent lives by its very existence.
54 posted on 10/25/2011 6:42:37 PM PDT by hinckley buzzard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: UriĀ’el-2012
Let's tell the terrorist where to look.

I imagine they have pretty decent security.

55 posted on 10/25/2011 10:44:08 PM PDT by Still Thinking (Freedom is NOT a loophole!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Moltke
My point is that I'm glad that we've developed our technology to the point that indiscriminate mass destruction of military and civilian alike is no longer a necessary and unavoidable tactic of warfare, be it nuclear or conventional.

Aside from that, I'm inspired by the words of a great American President:

If the Soviet Union will join with us in our effort to achieve major arms reduction we will have succeeded in stabilizing the nuclear balance. Nevertheless, it will still be necessary to rely on the specter of retaliation, on mutual threat. And that’s a sad commentary on the human condition. Wouldn’t it be better to save lives than to avenge them? Are we not capable of demonstrating our peaceful intentions by applying all our abilities and our ingenuity to achieving a truly lasting stability? I think we are. Indeed, we must.

What if free people could live secure in the knowledge that their security did not rest upon the threat of instant U.S. retaliation to deter a Soviet attack, that we could intercept and destroy strategic ballistic missiles before they reached our own soil or that of our allies? I know this is a formidable, technical task, one that may not be accomplished before the end of this century. Yet, current technology has attained a level of sophistication where it’s reasonable for us to begin this effort. It will take years, probably decades of effort on many fronts. There will be failures and setbacks, just as there will be successes and breakthroughs. And as we proceed, we must remain constant in preserving the nuclear deterrent and maintaining a solid capability for flexible response. But isn’t it worth every investment necessary to free the world from the threat of nuclear war? We know it is. - President Ronald Reagan, March 23, 1983

Was Reagan a "peacenik," too?

Indeed, shooting down ballistic missiles is a very formidable technical task, but we are equal to it. We shot down two ballistic missiles just three weeks ago, in fact. We should be proud that we have brought Reagan's grand prophetic vision to fruition.

56 posted on 10/26/2011 4:00:29 AM PDT by mvpel (Michael Pelletier)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: Still Thinking
Uri'el>Let's tell the terrorist where to look.

I imagine they have pretty decent security.

We'll see.

57 posted on 10/26/2011 7:39:05 AM PDT by Uri’el-2012 (Psalm 119:174 I long for Your salvation, YHvH, Your law is my delight.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: mvpel
My point is that I'm glad that we've developed our technology to the point that indiscriminate mass destruction of military and civilian alike is no longer a necessary and unavoidable tactic of warfare, be it nuclear or conventional.

With all due respect, even the smaller, remaining nukes are WMDs, and should they ever be used (which I dearly hope will never happen) anything, whether military or civilian, within radius "x" will be obliterated indescriminately. Nukes are not surgical instruments. So the 'big one' is dismantled. The ICBMs with MIRV warheads remain...same, same...IMO. (And 100% reliable missile interception - not the only way to deploy a nuke, mind you - is still a ways off.) Peace, nik. ;-)

58 posted on 10/26/2011 12:01:28 PM PDT by Moltke (Always retaliate first.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: Moltke
(And 100% reliable missile interception - not the only way to deploy a nuke, mind you - is still a ways off.)

No, it's not a ways off, actually.

59 posted on 10/26/2011 5:35:32 PM PDT by mvpel (Michael Pelletier)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-59 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson