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

To: discostu
It's even really hard to do with the most basic nuclear weapons made from Plutonium. Plutonium is so reactive that you have to use very sophisticated techniques to shape and implode the charges or the reaction runs away so fast that you can't get a decent yield. That's why primitive starts begin with Uranium.

We don't know to this day whether NoKorea has successfully detonated a Plutonium bomb. We know they are refining and stockpiling the metal, but a number of blasts observed in North Korea going back several years have all been estimated at sub-kiloton range [they've been detected via listening devices because they haven't even been powerful enough to tweak the seismometers -- at least not the civilian ones.]

Some weapons experts speculated at the time that those tests weren't even "kind of successful" low-yield. It's actually possible that they got themselves blown up improperly handling the high explosives needed for the implosion, and the results seen weren't nuclear explosions at all.

23 posted on 07/24/2015 3:51:45 PM PDT by FredZarguna (Next stop: anywhere but Willoughby.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies ]


To: FredZarguna

I blame Tom Clancy. He made it seem like dumb ass terrorists might pull it off, which must mean it’s easy. People forget his dumb ass terrorists started with a mostly working bomb, and then it didn’t detonate properly. Really folks, if it was that easy there’d be no point in the non-proliferation agreement and these negotiations because everybody would already have the bomb.


33 posted on 07/25/2015 8:08:41 AM PDT by discostu (It always comes down to cortexiphan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies ]

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