Skip to comments.US's most powerful nuclear bomb being dismantled
Posted on 10/25/2011 7:35:17 AM PDT by Scythian
AMARILLO, Texas (AP) The last of the nation's most powerful nuclear bombs a weapon hundreds of times stronger than the bomb dropped on Hiroshima is being disassembled nearly half a century after it was put into service at the height of the Cold War.
The final components of the B53 bomb will be broken down Tuesday at the Pantex Plant near Amarillo, the nation's only nuclear weapons assembly and disassembly facility. The completion of the dismantling program is a year ahead of schedule, according to the U.S. Department of Energy's National Nuclear Security Administration, and aligns with President Barack Obama's goal of reducing the number of nuclear weapons.
Thomas D'Agostino, the nuclear administration's chief, called the bomb's elimination a "significant milestone."
(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...
The film department at Iowa had a copy of this movie and ran it free nearly every Saturday night when I was there in the 60s.
Most of the audience could repeat the lines as the actors said them.
But what is true is that are armed forces are in full scale decline right now, and that goes complelety under the radar because of the economy and a President that is very popular with the media.
But what are we going to use to send out to a giant asteroid to blow the crap out of it before it hits the earth?
They were replaced in 1997. Back in the 90s B-52Hs were fitted with the Common Strategic Rotary Launcher. Those planes could no longer carry the B53. The B53 role of bunker busting by laydown delivery was replaced by the earth penetrating B61-11, up to eight of which could be carried on the CSRL, instead of the single B53 previously carried.
My brand of humor includes taking absurdities to logical conclusions with a straight face.
Agreed, and the biggest cause of the decline isn’t material (although that is bad enough).
It is the loss of focus, loss of a sense of mission and accomplishment and loss of the warrior ethos. The mental infection of the libtards is contagious. Every member of the armed services has to be asking him/her self, “What’s the point?” The social experimentation, and especially the withdrawal of DADT will have far reaching consequences. The interplay of sexual issues is bad enough now. Once the effects of the repeal of DADT are manifest, the prolems will increase exponentially and really cut into readiness.
Are you talking about the same lamestream media that couldn't find Chicago on a map when Obama ran last time, but could fine Wasilla? Might be they don't want to know...
Damn, that’s like being 12 years old and having to throw away the biggest firecracker in your collection.
Couldn’t they’ve just dropped it on Tehran, say instead of sending a Chrismas card?
I’m surprised we didn’t donate it to a lesser country. It isn’t fair that Venezuela doesn’t have one, or the emerging democracies of Libya, Egypt...
Assuming a detonation at optimum height, a 9 megaton blast would result in a fireball some 4 to 5 kilometers (2.5 to 3 miles) in diameter. The radiated heat would be sufficient to cause lethal burns to any unprotected person within a 28.7 kilometers (17.8 mi) radius (995 square miles (2,580 km2)). Blast effects would be sufficient to collapse most residential and industrial structures within a 14.9-kilometer (9.3 mi) radius (300 square miles (780 km2)); within 5.7 kilometers (3.5 mi) virtually all above-ground structures would be destroyed and blast effects would inflict near 100% fatalities. Within 4.7 kilometers (2.9 mi) a 500 rem dose of ionizing radiation would be received by the average person, sufficient to cause a 50% to 90% casualty rate independent of thermal or blast effects at this distance.
Your post isn’t particularly amusing in light of this, is it? This weapon is immoral, and its dismantling should be celebrated by all people of good conscience.
What, in your view, is a moral weapon?
I'd agree that the actual use of such a weapon may be immoral. But the mere prospect of the consequences of the use such weapons (conventional wisdom has it) kept two enemies apart for half a century.
The scenario wherein such weapons would have actually been used is apocalyptic. He who Is would render the verdict, not any of us.
I believe that’s been common knowledge for years.
Obama is sure making sure the world for America is a very unsafe place! Middle East ready to erupt into G-d knows what, every ally we ever had wondering if we will stand with them and now here we are destroying weaponry we can’t afford to rebuild.
It was published in the Sandia Base newspaper Listing the locations involved in the softball league. Sandia Base was an open base in 1959.
You are absolutely correct.
in 1959 available in the PX on base for all to see.
It was published in the Sandia Base newspaper
Listing the locations involved in the softball league.
Sandia Base was an open base in 1959.
Don’t be a smart-ass.
Anyone who knows anything about the US nuclear arsenal knows that everything goes through Pantex sooner or later.
And Pantex is almost 400 miles from Sandia.
Were Little Boy and Fat Man immoral weapons?
I give you a piece of TradeCraft
from 1959 and you go non-linear.
The article made no sense,
they did not know how to
disassemble something from 1964.
I'm not sure, but I reckon that a weapon that levels a 20-mile-wide circle and can inflict fatal burns across nearly a thousand square miles is not moral.
When in your war against a city, you have to besiege it a long time in order to capture it, you must not destroy its trees, wielding the ax against them. You may eat of them, but you must not cut them down. Are trees of the field human to withdraw before you into a besieged city? - Deuteronomy 20:19.
Do you own a firearm?
Or do you use the Law to promote Lawlessness ?
Do you consider yourself under the Law ? shalom b'SHEM Yah'shua HaMashiach
Or do you use the Law to promote Lawlessness ?