Replies

MJY1288 say: " I was under the impression that the only way to detect a Nuclear device (pre-detonated) was from a very close range "

Correct, but with a caveat. Here is what the Department of Energy's Office of Scientific and Technical Information (the lead agency in the technical aspects of nuclear proliferation and test ban enforcement) has to say about even very close range detection of nuclear weapons:

"Another difficulty is that several types of weapon designs can make it almost impossible, using radiation measurements, to confirm that a declared item is a weapon." (source)

Of course there is always the argument that when discussing militarily sensitive technology that what they admit to today may well be a generation or two behind our real capabilities. But the task of satellite based radiation detection of nuclear warheads is daunting, to say the least, and may well be beyond man's capabilities to ever do.

Regards,

Boot Hill

Thanks for the clarification... I only mentioned RADEC originally to see if, in fact, that was what was being referred to... If RADEC was the 'magic bullet', one would think our NEST Teams would be using it, instead of chasing stuff around on the ground :0)

Boot Hill: Thanks again for the clearification, I've always taken the position that it's better to remain silent and thought a fool, than to speak up and remove all doubt. And that's why I didn't challenge the claims made by palmer, I had my doubt's, but I wasn't informed enough to speak on the subject. Thanks to you and your sources, I am now.

palmer: I would imagine you would like to defend or explain your statements, I will wait until you do before I respond to the apparent disionformation you posted