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

To: bert
I don’t think conventional explosives capable of vaporizing uranium or plutonium. The masses are so dense, I can’t believe it would not remain intact.

They can burn. Think of a magnesium fire with lethal smoke. The only 'good' thing is the oxides are so heavy that they rapidly settle out.

97 posted on 10/04/2007 11:06:54 AM PDT by null and void (<---- Living a life of quiet desperation...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies ]


To: null and void

.....Think of a magnesium fire ...

I have in mind a uranium bullet that penetrates tank armour and becomes incandescant but remains intact. they are said to rattle around in the tank.

If there was a moab, I don’t think the explosion would be capable of disintegrating the uranium mass. It might be blown away, but is intact where it landed. If intact, it is recoverable.


114 posted on 10/04/2007 11:24:46 AM PDT by bert (K.E. N.P. +12 . Moveon is not us...... Moveon is the enemy)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 97 | View Replies ]

To: null and void
When the first plutonium bomb was going to be tested at Trinity, they ordered a 250 ton steel containment vessel, nicknamed "Jumbo", that was supposed to be used around the bomb, just in case the fission failed.

It was to contain the plutonium that they worked so long and hard to extract and refine, instead of scattering it all over the site.

The confidence in the bomb was such, that it wasn't used, and is still rusting away at the site.

Trinity is open to visitors two days a year, once in the Spring, and again in the Fall.

225 posted on 10/04/2007 1:16:52 PM PDT by Calvin Locke
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 97 | 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