Posted on 06/28/2026 2:12:17 AM PDT by Jonty30
Iranian suicide/loitering drones (kamikaze UAVs) typically have modest payload capacities, in the range of 30–50 kg for the most common types, with some variants or larger models reaching higher. Key Examples
Shahed-136 (most prominent, widely exported/used): ~200 kg total weight, payload ~30–50 kg (commonly cited as ~40 kg warhead). Russian variants (Geran-2) have reached ~90 kg in some modified configurations by reducing fuel/range. Shahed-131 (smaller variant): ~10–20 kg payload. Other types like Ababil series or Hadid-110: Often 30–40 kg. Larger systems (e.g., Arash series): Up to ~225–260 kg in some reports, but these are less common for pure "suicide drone" roles.
These payloads are optimized for high-explosive, fragmentation, or thermobaric warheads — effective against infrastructure, vehicles, or personnel in swarms, but far smaller than typical ballistic missile warheads (hundreds of kg).
Nuclear Payload Feasibility A functional nuclear warhead is much heavier and more complex than conventional explosives:
The smallest deployed nuclear devices (e.g., U.S. W54 "Davy Crockett"/SADM from the 1950s–60s) weighed around 23–26 kg complete (including casing, explosives, etc.), with very low yield (tons to low kilotons).
Modern compact designs still require significant fissile material, high explosives for implosion, neutron initiators, electronics, and robust casing — practically tens of kg minimum for anything reliable.
Iran's known nuclear program (enrichment, etc.) has not been publicly confirmed to have produced operational, weaponized, miniaturized warheads suitable for small drones. Delivering a credible nuclear device would demand advanced miniaturization, testing, and integration that exceeds current open-source assessments of their capabilities.
In theory, a Shahed-136 or similar could potentially carry a very small, backpack-style nuclear device if one existed and fit within ~30–50+ kg (with trade-offs in range/fuel). Larger Iranian UAVs (e.g., Mohajer-6 or Shahed-149 "Gaza" with hundreds of kg capacity) would have more margin. In practice, this is highly constrained:
Payload limits drastically reduce range when maximized. Guidance, reliability, and survivability of slow propeller-driven drones make them poor for high-value strategic nuclear delivery compared to missiles. Proliferation, testing, and command/control issues would be massive barriers.
Iran's drone strategy emphasizes cheap, massed conventional attacks to overwhelm defenses rather than nuclear delivery. Nuclear-capable platforms would more likely involve their ballistic/cruise missile programs. This remains speculative and is a major concern for proliferation watchers, but current drone tech points to conventional use.
Dear FRiends,
We need your continuing support to keep FR funded. Your donations are our sole source of funding. No sugar daddies, no advertisers, no paid memberships, no commercial sales, no gimmicks, no tax subsidies. No spam, no pop-ups, no ad trackers.
If you enjoy using FR and agree it's a worthwhile endeavor, please consider making a contribution today:
Click here: to donate by Credit Card
Or here: to donate by PayPal
Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC - PO Box 9771 - Fresno, CA 93794
Thank you very much and God bless you,
Jim
They don’t need a bomb. All they would have to do is take some of that plutonium dust and explode it over tel Aviv and they would have to evacuate a large part of the city for a very long time.
The Sum Of All Fears scenario?
And, for the record, I ABSOLUTELY had the Twin Towers on my bingo card. In fairness, I couldn’t have said, “three planes here, here, and here,” but - yeah - completely on my bingo card. I watched 1993, and that was way, way, way down the road for me.
When I watched Tip O’Neill screw Reagan and then G. Edwards Griffin interview Besmenov - when it happened - I knew what the Democrats were then and predicted pretty much everything the Democrats have shown us to date starting in the mid-80s. And I was told I was delusional for over 40 years saying it.
And I grew up in Southeast Michigan in the middle of what is now Rashida Tliab’s district. The highest concentration is Muslims in the world outside the Middle East and Singapore. I have known what Islam is since I was a child. And what it really is.
So, yes, I had the Twin Towers on my bingo card.
Wanna talk about how long you’ve been an “expert” who’s going to school me on my lack of imagination?
“10 lb of mercury (about a pint) would contaminate 1800 acre feet or drinking water or about 2.3 billion liters. “
Your math is decent but the rest not so.
Ingesting elemental mercury is relatively harmless.
Yes, that is correct. But even more to the point, filtering mercury from water is trivial.
Can I get the math on what “a little” plutonium is?
And where are they getting the plutonium? HEU exists, at 60%, and we buried it on the order of 10-20 stories underground, and we’re monitoring the sites so they can move equipment in and start digging it out.
Iran has no operating breeder reactors.
So, again, where are they going to get the plutonium?
Tucker’s best friend is Max Blumenthal. Son of Sid. Admitted co-author of the Russian/Steele dossier and longtime henchman for Hillary Clinton.
I guess you are right about the reservoir absorption.the
I misspoke. I was referring to the enriched uranium at Fordo, Natanz or Isfahan. They must have at least one dirty bomb warhead in their stockpile. If one of the Mahdi apocalyptics get truly desperate over there.... (God forbid)
“But even more to the point, filtering mercury from water is trivial.”
Effective Filtration Technologies
Reverse Osmosis (RO): Forces water through a semi-permeable membrane. This process removes 95% to 97% of mercury along with other dissolved solids.
Activated Carbon: Uses porous carbon media to trap organic and inorganic mercury compounds. Note: The specific filter model must be explicitly tested and rated for heavy metals, as standard carbon filters only target taste and odor.
KDF (Kinetic Degradation Fluxion): Uses copper-zinc formulations to change mercury into insoluble matter that can be physically strained out.
Distillation: Heats water into steam and re-condenses it into a separate container, leaving the heavy metals behind.
https://www.google.com/search?q=drinking+water+filtering+mercury
“Iran has no operating breeder reactors.
So, again, where are they going to get the plutonium?”
If a reactor has uranium it produces plutonium.
Our PWRS are loaded with only LEU but after several cycles produce about 40% of the power from plutonium.
But this spent fuel is very radioactive.
They're not. The Mponeng mine in South Africa is the deepest mine in the world, and it hasn't reached 4 km depth yet, though it's planned to around 4.2 km.
“I misspoke. I was referring to the enriched uranium at Fordo, Natanz or Isfahan. They must have at least one dirty bomb warhead in their stockpile. “
A ‘dirty bomb’ would most likely contain irradiated components.
Can the US credibly, efrectively screen with sensors/inspections everything brought in here to test for radiation or... lead-lined containers to mask radiation? How far away can we detect them?
Why would Iran even bother with drones when they have many missile types and an IRBM that could easily pack a nuke?
You having an inkling that the Twin Towers could be targeted a second time is a bit of a surprise.
My focus has been corruption and incompetence in government since seeing it while in grade school. After that it was easy to see everywhere.
The FBI’s biggest success has been the PR campaign Hoover initiated. Other that they have a blemished record.
The CIA is much worse.
Watching the continuing government incompetence, working in the power industry for decades (mostly nuclear) and respecting Iranian scientists, I still think a dirty bomb is possible.
An IRBM can easily pack a nuke if you’re capable of producing a nuke that can sit on the head of an IRBM. And if you have the HEU to make it. Iran currently has neither.
They could make a dirty bomb *if* they can get the material.
Iran’s IRBMs are estimated at 750-1500kg payload capacity. Little Boy was over 4000kg, and Fat Man was a little larger at about 4700kg. Iran isn’t at the sophistication of Little Boy or Fat Man yet, and they don’t have access to the HEU they’ve produced so far.
There’s a lot of talk about “mini-bombs” but see earlier discussion on realism there. You can make a smaller core than Little Man, but not much smaller and it still be useful, and the issue is the entire payload, not the core, from the standpoint of delivery. Iran doesn’t have the miniiaturization capability needed for this.
Oh - I knew they were coming for the Twin Towers again. Anyone who paid attention to what was said after 1993 and what was said in the trial knew that. Like I said - that they would weaponize a plane the way they did - no - I didn’t predict that for sure. But I knew they were coming for the Twin Towers again.
The CIA and FBI are both better and worse in the sense you mean. They have a lot of successes that aren’t talked about, and a lot of failures that aren’t talked about as well. But the biggest issue almost no one knows about is the level of disinformation.
For more than 50 years the lie that the CIA caused or had any significant role in the Mosaddegh incident, for instance, is still considered “gospel” truth and that we got what we deserved in 1979 because of it. All 100% lies - still the media narrative today. We had little if any role in what happened, and Mosaddegh was a corrupt pig that the Iranian legislature wanted gone and petitioned the Shah repeatedly to remove him before the Shah finally acted, and well within his authority at the urging of the rest of his government.
That’s the opposite of the CIA lies about the incident that the media parrot.
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.