No, it is also an electronic hurdle, as the initial signal must reach the detonators at the precise same time, and the detonators are at non-uniform distances from the initial signal.
Posted on 07/14/2005 12:24:33 PM PDT by Sweetjustusnow
Paul M. Williams author of The Al-Queda Connection which is due to be released soon, provides a compilation of data based on; FBI, CIA, Vice President Cheney, Homeland Security, Attorney General Ashcroft and news sources. Makes a strong case that there are 20 suitcase nukes in the USA which have been smuggled in through the border with Mexico.
No, it is also an electronic hurdle, as the initial signal must reach the detonators at the precise same time, and the detonators are at non-uniform distances from the initial signal.
Yes, you can. The specs are pretty good even on cheap parts; and the scope is just the tool to screen them for a perfect match. The SCRs are cheap; and, you could purchase 10,000 of them for small change just to match up 100 or so. The system timing can be tweeked by tuning the length of the wires between the SCR and the detonator. (The scope at 1Ghtz)
Do you really think it is easier to accomplish this with WWII electronics and equipment than with today's "off the shelf" components and test equipment? Poor grade SCRs have much better tolerances than the very best thyratrons.
Besides, we are talking about devices of Soviet manufacture, not homespun jobs.
I have already told you that this is not even slightly difficult. A good scope can be used for this tuning; and is accomplished merely by adjusting the lengths of the wires. (About 1 nanosecond per foot, if you don't know.)
When one lays out a circuit board for todays processors, very close timings must be observed. Much better than for an atomic bomb.
A really incredible scope can be purchased for about $7,000. I don't think one that good is required.
A more real threat, on the other hand, is China. China would be a likely resupplier of fissionable material to terrorists than would Russia. Some of the recent threads on China's nuclear threat are ominous.
The full weight of a 767 doesn't even come close to 500,000 tons, let alone the fuel load. In fact, the maximum takeoff weight of a 767 is 450,000 POUNDS, with the fuel capacity of 23,980 gallons. (.5Kt is 1 mega pounds) JP4 is pretty wimpy compared to TNT. That report was super duper wrong.
Probably pretty precise, but radiation-induced damage to the conductors of wiring won't be large enough to affect it.
Think about it for a minute---the only mechanism for radiation damage is for the radiation to displace electrons from their "normal" bonds and orbits. In silicon chips and similar devices, and in wiring insulation, some (or most) of those electrons get trapped and cannot return to their "normal" state. BUT, because wiring is conductive throughout its volume, any "displaced" electron (or another conductance band electron) "zips" into the displacement location as soon as the inducing radiation ceases, thus eliminating the "damage". To cause irreversible radiation damage in conducting wires requires HUGE radiation fluxes.
I'm not from Kentucky, and you cared enough to throw out another childish jibe at those who are. Do you really determine the value of someone's opinion and intellect based on their address. Sad.
It would not be impossible to make one. There are numerous reports of fissionable material missing from railroad freight yards. The tools available to common people of today are highly more sophisticated that those that were available to the Manhattan project ...How often do you suppose that certain areas are 'scanned' from street level (via drive bys) with sensitive radiation detectors/Geiger counters?
Are the border crossings into Mexico equipped with the appropriate sensors (DON'T even suggest that a practical-sized device (non-suitcase sized) is going to be dragged across the desert into the US!)
No, you can't, not with off-the-shelf parts alone (do not confuse this statement with saying that off-the-shelf components won't work). It takes more than that.
Let me give you a comparable situation. There was a Georgia university experiment that was repeated in California and published today in which ultrasound was used to form bubbles in dueterium acetone, which, seeded with extra neutrons, caused microscopic fission when perfect bubbles impoded. However, in this experiment, the researchers noted that imperfect bubbles failed to obtain this effect.
Do you know how small the differences are between perfect bubbles in a liquid from imperfect bubbles?!
The implosion has to be perfect to obtain the effect. The resistance in the wires, in the wiring connections, the heat on each wire, connection, and component...everything has to be precise...and remain precise no matter how much radiation has increased or decreased heat or resistance in any area. It has to be a perfect bubble imploding.
The number of times this topic has been covered on FR is in the hundreds. There is simply no technical possibility that the foot-locker sized transportable atomic weapons that the USSR produced in the late 70's through mid '80's remain serviceable and usable today. If you possessed one you'd been in a world of hurt trying to get it do anything other than give you a bad case of radiation poisoning.
Where are the numerous credible reports of missing fissionable material? It's always brought up, but the amounts missing always end up being trivial, or the actual missing material of the wrong type.
There are clearly Pakistanis and Iraqis with the requisite knowledge to build a bomb. To succeed they would need series of unlikely events, not to mention plenty of time and advanced facilities to build the bomb. It will, of course, not be a suitcase sized bomb, but a large, crude, poorly shielded (and therefore easily detected) device. It will throw off radition, sicken and even kill those who work on it and transport, and likely become unstable or unusuable during transport.
You people think that building a servicable, transportable nuclear weapon is something that a few Islamists with an engineering degree can pull off. If so, how did Sadaam not get the job done in 20 years of trying? Why did it take the North Koreans so long as well? The odds of such a weapon working is slim to none.
As for purchasing these devices from disaffected Russians, this story has been hyped and discredited a thousand times.
So why have not one of these bombs been detonated yet?? This is pure B.S. There are no suitcase bombs.
It is not entirely reasonable to think the Russians couldn't keep supplying replacement parts for a good price.This means staff, materials, machines and payroll; ALL traceable on some level ...
These guys are dedicated warriors. They would prefer to measure our response before they would proceed.I say only two of their four hijacked aircraft on 9/11 reached their original, intended target; the 3rd opted for a target of opportunity found along the way after they were unable to find 'their primary' target ...
I wonder if the radiation detectors are sensitive enough to find a nuke if it has been buried under a foot of cocaine?
Mena comes to mind ...
That's incorrect. Electron radiation is comparably tame (though it could do the deed if a particular electron caused a spontaneous neutron emission such as what we see when Be is mixed with Po-210). Neutrons are also being radiated, and they have to go *somewhere*. The heavier your shielding, the fewer such neutrons go somewhere that interrupts your design...but no matter how thick your shielding, not all neutrons are ever fully shielded.
Neutrons that hit atoms in your wiring *will* impact your wiring, be it heat, resistence, or other potential changes. The fewer neutrons that hit your wiring, the less serious the impact, of course, but neutron emission over time increases the odds of adverse impacts.
The longer the time, the less escapes damage. This factors in to how often you replace the wiring, the electronics, the conventional explosives, the pits, the cores, and the triggers in your weapon. Certainly the less shielding that you have (e.g. a suitcase nuke), the more frequent you have to serve up high quality maintenance.
Even I can purchase electronic SCRs with picosecond tolerancesSCR's with pico-second tolerances?
Got any device numbers (JEDEC or otherwise) you'd like to share (I've got apps for SCR's THAT fast)?
The only thing I've seen in that category are LDMOS devices; basically RF parts ...
If they are/were so hard to maintain how did the Commies keep them usable? Did they collect them regularly and ship them back to Moscow or did they have an on-site traveling crew? As I said in an earlier post most of our engineering schools are full of Pakistani and Irani students, a few of which I am sure are true believers and would have the skills and training to take care of these things.
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.