To: Mike Darancette; blam
.2 kilotons is way small for a city buster.
5 posted on
06/09/2003 5:38:46 PM PDT by
RightWhale
(gazing at shadows)
To: RightWhale; Billthedrill; Little Bill
".2 kilotons is way small for a city buster." I remember this being reported, dang if I didn't forget all about it. 40 square miles, I wonder what kind of wave that would have made in the Gulf Of Mexico?
32 posted on
06/09/2003 6:21:49 PM PDT by
blam
To: RightWhale
".2 kilotons is way small for a city buster."
The area mentioned is only about 6.2 miles square. Not very big! Not sure how that relates to Nagasaki area and size.
47 posted on
06/09/2003 7:04:36 PM PDT by
lawdude
(Liberalism: A failure every time it is tried.)
To: RightWhale
.2 kilotons is way small for a city buster. My thinking exactly. Hardly seems possibly that it would destroy 40 square miles of forest.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson