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

To: Terry L Smith

You are referring to a novel, and not a text book. It is understandable as the conventional bomb itself is more dangerous than the dirty stuff that is added. Please note that a dirty bomb is dirty due to the radioactive material in it. This material is not a nuclear device, it just contaminates the area with the radioactive materials. This contamination will last a only short time, depending on the material, the amount and the particle size.

The danger is due to its psychological effect nothing else.


14 posted on 06/08/2015 1:20:28 PM PDT by AdmSmith (GCTGATATGTCTATGATTACTCAT)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies ]


To: AdmSmith; Terry L Smith; SunkenCiv; caww; BeauBo; All

You say this contamination will last a only short time. However it is my understanding that some suitable elements for a “dirty bomb” have a half life of a number of years, not a “short time.”


16 posted on 06/08/2015 2:03:12 PM PDT by gleeaikin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies ]

To: AdmSmith
The danger is due to its psychological effect nothing else.

Quite correct and shielding necessary to conceal and safely transport such a device would make it prohibitively heavy and large.

Much better bang for your buck with conventional explosives. Don't get me wrong it will make a big mess but that is about it.

20 posted on 06/08/2015 3:29:34 PM PDT by usurper (Liberals GET OFF MY LAWN)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | 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