Replies

I would like to know the actual results of a neutron bomb. It looks like the best way for us to get the information we need to root out the cells would come from getting into their facilities and hideouts with minimal destruction and with no time for them to destroy the information. I believe it kills all biological activity, no rotting corpses, etc. but does it have any effect on electronics, hard drives, etc. Please don't bother to respond with "Your a crazy nut case calling for nukes", etc.

I would like to know the actual results of a neutron bomb We supposedly had 350 8-inch shells and 350 Lance warheads in 1991. We might not have any working neutron bombs now due to an interruption of several years of our tritium production at Savannah River. Their fuel may have been recycled years ago.

The Cox Report accuses China of stealing our nuclear secrets including the neutron bomb and that our design of an improved neutron bomb led to China's first successful neutron bomb test after their initial failure to construct one themselves.

The U.S. neutron bomb has only been stored on American soil, never deployed overseas for actual use or placed on ICBM's. It was intended primarily to be used in blunting a tank attack against western Europe and against facilities located in the countries of the former Warsaw Pact in eastern Europe, as I understand it.

It's hard to deny that American development of neutron bomb technology has actually made America less secure.

A neutron bomb is actually just a hydrogen bomb without the outer casing of lithium which produces the fusion explosion, the really big bang and all the heavy fallout and heavy particles that we associate with hydrogen bombs.

"The laws of momentum show that the maximum transfer of energy in an elastic collision with a stationary particle occurs when the two particles are closest in mass. A neutron and a proton are of very similar mass, so if there was a collision between them there would be a large energy transfer. The idea of a neutron bomb is to create a large flux of neutrons of high energy, because neutrons are uncharged they would then be able to penetrate great distances without being stopped like other charged radiation's, like alpha and beta particles, in the ten minutes or so that is the half life of a free neutron. However when these neutrons collide with hydrogen nuclei, which would be most likely to be in the bodies of living animals and people, because the nuclei are single protons they will absorb lots of this energy, destroying any organic molecules that they are part of. This is very likely to kill any organism within about fifteen miles of the detonation. A good neutron bomb would also have a very low destruction yield, and be low fallout. This would mean that it could be used say on a tank regiment, and all the tank crews would be killed leaving the area safe for your occupying troops to move into. Russia is definitely thought to have this type of bomb, and dispute the public outcry in 1977 when it was disclosed that America was also trying to make one, it is likely that they have developed this very nasty weapon (would probably be a very painfully slow way to die as all your cells would slowly rupture)."

I don't think we can stomach the use of this thing anywhere close to civilians. It's pretty dangerous to seriously consider using them at all. I wonder if it would even be effective on those who are hiding in deep caves in Afghanistan.

I would like to know the actual results of a neutron bomb. Now you got me interested. We developed the W-63 through W-66's in the early to late Sixties. 70 W-65's produced around '75, retired in '85. The W-79 artillery shells could be configured as either a conventional fission bomb or as a neutron bomb (enhanced radiation weapon in military terms). These W-79 were supposedly retired in '92. The W-82 dual-capable shells were also supposedly cancelled.

The Cox Report lists the seven types of nuclear designs the Chinese stole from us. Included is the W-70, a weapon that could be deployed in four configurations: Mods 0, 1 and 2 were small fission nukes of 1-100 kilotons. As of '97, the Mod 3 bombs have never been declared retired. There are 380 of these. They can be deployed on Lance SSM missiles. The W-70 neutron bomb has a yield of 1 kiloton. By comparison, Hiroshima was 16 kilotons and it appears that the Mk-III was the one used on Nagasaki and yielded 18 kilotons. Naturally, you could probably reduce damage from a W-70 neutron bomb by airbursting it to cause less damage and widen the circle of destruction further.

So, apparently, if we've got 'em and haven't salvaged their tritium or let them fall into unusable condition, these are our neutron bombs.

Going by what I can find, I'd have to say that we may not even have any neutron bombs at present. I think from reading the available literature that we could modify another nuclear weapon very quickly though. We should also keep in mind that the great passion for development right now among nuclear weapons enthusiasts is for mini-nukes or micro-nukes. I started laughing recently when one of them in the Pentagon talked about building nuclear weapons that are non-lethal. Like a big firecracker, I guess.

"Tactical neutron bombs are primarily intended to kill soldiers who are protected by armor. Armored vehicles are very resistant to blast and heat produced by nuclear weapons, but steel armor can reduce neutron radiation only by a modest amount so the lethal range from neutrons greatly exceeds that of other weapon effects. The lethal range for tactical neutron bombs can exceed the lethal range for blast and heat even for unprotected troops. Armor can absorb neutrons and neutron energy, thus reducing the neutron radiation to which the tank crew is exposed, but this offset to some extent by the fact that armor can also react harmfully with neutrons. Alloy steels for example can develop induced radioactivity that remains dangerous for some time. When fast neutrons are slowed down, the energy lost can show up as x-rays. Some types of armor, like that of the M-1 tank, employ depleted uranium which can undergo fast fission, generating additional neutrons and becoming radioactive. Special neutron absorbing armor techniques have also been developed, such as armors containing boronated plastics and the use of vehicle fuel as a shield." reference: http://www.virtualschool.edu/mon/Outlaws/faq1 "Also called ENHANCED RADIATION WARHEAD, specialized type of small thermonuclear weapon that produces minimal blast and heat but which releases large amounts of lethal radiation. The neutron bomb delivers blast and heat effects that are confined to an area of only a few hundred yards in radius. But within a somewhat larger area it throws off a massive wave of neutron and gamma radiation, which can penetrate armour or several feet of earth. This radiation is extremely destructive to living tissue. Because of its short-range destructiveness and the absence of long-range effect, the neutron bomb would be highly effective against tank and infantry formations on the battlefield but would not endanger cities or other population centres only a few miles away. It can be carried in a Lance missile or delivered by an 8-inch (200-millimetre) howitzer, or possibly by attack aircraft. In strategic terms, the neutron bomb has a theoretical deterrent effect: discouraging an armoured ground assault by arousing the fear of neutron bomb counterattack. The bomb would disable enemy tank crews in minutes, and those exposed would die within days. U.S. production of the bomb was postponed in 1978 and resumed in 1981." reference: http://www.britannica.com/seo/n/neutron-bomb/