Chupacabra Posted January 2, 2001 Share Posted January 2, 2001 ...or at least, that's what you'd have to think to fire one of these bad girls. Trust the Cold War to produce something so unbelievably stupid. Man, if you think Puppchen use is gamey now, think of how people would use these things ------------------ Soy super bien soy super super bien soy bien bien super bien bien bien super super Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest MantaRay Posted January 2, 2001 Share Posted January 2, 2001 Screw that, max range 1.24 miles, that would not only cook the Soviets, but the people firing it. It would be like Kamakazees on steroids. Thank God we never used that one! Ray ------------------ When asked, "How many moves do you see ahead?", CAPABLANCA replied: "One move - the best one." Click now for shelter from the Peng thread The Red Army of the Rugged Defense Group Ladder Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Rob/1 Posted January 2, 2001 Share Posted January 2, 2001 HUm thats a um intrestion um wepon if you can call it one Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sensible Toad Posted January 2, 2001 Share Posted January 2, 2001 Oh my God!!!!! Just when I was starting to think the world was a sane, rational place you show me undeniable evidence that we are a crazy, suicidal, homicidal pack of mutant primates eagerly searching for our own destruction. Thanks Chup, and have a nice day. ps. Nuke Land Minds!!!!! Ugh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Mr. Johnson-<THC>- Posted January 2, 2001 Share Posted January 2, 2001 Nice Find Chupacabra! Those don't look so stupid to me. I would like to have a few of those during WW3 to toss at Red Army battle groups storming across Europe. Talk about a force multiplier. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chupacabra Posted January 2, 2001 Author Share Posted January 2, 2001 According to this website, only 400 of the Mk-54 warhead were produced, production halted in 1965, and they were retired in 1971. So no chance of these things showing up in your local neighborhood intifada anytime soon, although it's not like we don't have plenty of nukes floating around anyway. ------------------ Soy super bien soy super super bien soy bien bien super bien bien bien super super Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spook Posted January 2, 2001 Share Posted January 2, 2001 Actually, I first learned of this nasty little beast---the "Davey Crockett"---from Norm Koger, the designer of the TOAW game series, back in 1998. It was related by him the same way here----anyone who fired off this mini-nuke couldn't presume to survive it himself (unless bunkered down and wearing a full suite of NBC protection clothing). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StellarRat Posted January 2, 2001 Share Posted January 2, 2001 The warhead was only .01 kilotons (according to the web page.) I'm sure they could have survived by jumping into a foxhole or getting behind some cover right after they fired. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Schrullenhaft Posted January 3, 2001 Share Posted January 3, 2001 Interesting... Back in the day when a nuclear weapon development was seen in mathematical terms of its yeild. Disregarding its radiation, thermal/pressure shockwave and other fissible-material properties I wonder what the survivability would be for the launch team being up to 1.2 miles from a 10-ton TNT explosion ? I remember seeing pictures of this weapon back in my childhood days. My elementary school had a book on the Force Reorganization of the US Army in the late 50s/early 60s. Heady, unfathomable material for an 8 year old, but it had cool (though dated) pictures ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jshandorf Posted January 3, 2001 Share Posted January 3, 2001 Are you sure it wasn't wire guided? Jeff ------------------ I once killed a six pack just to watch it die. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
L.Tankersley Posted January 3, 2001 Share Posted January 3, 2001 Here are some facts about the effects of a 1 kiloton surface burst taking place one mile away, courtesy of the nifty-keen Nuclear Bomb Effects Computer, based on data from The Effects of Nuclear Weapons, revised edition of 1977 (unclassified version, natch). (Note this is a yield 100 times greater than that generated by the weapon cited.) The maximum overpressure is about 0.6 psi, maximum dynamic pressure is less than 0.01 psi, and the maximum wind generated would be 21 mph. This is sufficient to break windows, but not much else. Thermal radiation would be less than 1 cal/cm^2, insufficient to cause significant burns to bare skin. Prompt nuclear radiation dose would be about 5 rems, unlikely to have any significant effect. If the blast took place in dry soil or soft rock, the crater would be approximately 0.005 miles (26.4 feet) deep and 0.01 miles (52.8 feet) across, and ejecta would be ... ejected in a radius of approximately 0.025 miles (132 feet). Note: for comparison, things are much worse if you're only 1,056 feet (0.2 miles) from the blast: Peak overpressure is 9 psi, max dynamic pressure close to 2 psi, and the max wind velocity is over 250 mph. This is sufficient to knock down almost anything that's not buried. It's also enough to accelerate a 165-pound man standing upright to a velocity of 20 ft/sec in the first 10 feet of travel. It is insufficient to kill directly, but might cause some lung damage, and lots of ruptured eardrums. Of course, if you're not behind something, either you are going to fly through the air and hit something VERY HARD, or something will fly thoguh the air and hit you VERY HARD, so your eardrums will be the least of your worries. Thermal effects are 20 cal/cm^2, well past the level of 3rd degree burns, and sufficient to ignite ... well, lots of things. The prompt nuclear radiation dose would be up around 3x10^4 rems. No one exposed to that much is surviving more than a day or so, probably much less. So I guess the point is, this weapon system actually could have been used without killing the firer. Unfortunately, the computer only goes down to a 1KT yield and I don't feel like doing the math to calculate actual values for 0.01 KT, but obviously it would be significantly less. I hope this cheers everyone up. ------------------ Leland J. Tankersley Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Heidman Posted January 3, 2001 Share Posted January 3, 2001 The simple fact is that this is just one of many nuclear weapons that NATO thought would be necessary to stop any Soviet invasion. Reminds me of the old joke: Q: What is the definition of a tactical nuclear weapon? A: One that goes off in Germany. Jeff Heidman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Germanboy Posted January 3, 2001 Share Posted January 3, 2001 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Jeff Heidman: Q: What is the definition of a tactical nuclear weapon? A: One that goes off in Germany. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> The French only introduced a medium range nuclear missile capable of reaching beyond Germany in the late 80s, early 90s, I believe. Fact is that 'Better Red than Dead' applied to German civilians, and not US ones, so what was the problem? ------------------ Andreas Der Kessel Home of „Die Sturmgruppe“; Scenario Design Group for Combat Mission. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skott Karlsson Posted January 3, 2001 Share Posted January 3, 2001 Yes, these can also be seen on one of the History Channels shows. The soldiers were required to set this weapon up, dig a trench or foxhole, fire the weapon and then quickly jump into the said trench or foxhole. Pretty assine if you ask me but what do you expect from a government that tested and exposed its own soldiers to radiation just to see what would happen to them. For all our bluff and moral talk about other countries and how they do dispecable things to their people our government has done much the same. We just hide it to our citizens better. That or we citizens refuse to believe our government could do such terrible things. And no.. I'm not disloyal to my country. I proudly did my duty for 4 years and love this country tremendously. I wouldnt want to live anywhere else. It just saddens me that our government is no better than those countries we constantly criticize at times. ~Skott Karlsson~ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StellarRat Posted January 3, 2001 Share Posted January 3, 2001 If they gave it to me and said it's OK to use it then I'd fire the thing instead of being overrun by angry Russians. I'd worry about the radiation after I was done worrying about being shot, blown-up, etc... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Major Tom Posted January 3, 2001 Share Posted January 3, 2001 Nuke first, pick of radiated skin later... Might as well have given these troops some blankets to hide under for the good a trench would do them. It is kind of interesting, as, that the goal of these hordes Russians will be the very civilians and land nuked by NATO weaponry. I guess the NATO theory that Germans were better served if they were exterminated then have to deal with communism! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pvt. Ryan Posted January 3, 2001 Share Posted January 3, 2001 I found a video of one of these things in use: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Kettler Posted January 3, 2001 Share Posted January 3, 2001 A most interesting site! I seem to recall that the Davy Crockett was pulled when the Pentagon belatedly realized who'd be operating it--that deadliest of weapon combinations, a second lieutenant with a map. Perhaps it was knowing that a short round could vaporize a battalion! Pvt. Ryan, thanks for a much-needed laugh. Sick and deranged to be sure, but a laugh nonetheless! Regards, John Kettler Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saru3000 Posted January 3, 2001 Share Posted January 3, 2001 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Spook: Actually, I first learned of this nasty little beast---the "Davey Crockett"---from Norm Koger, the designer of the TOAW game series, back in 1998. It was related by him the same way here----anyone who fired off this mini-nuke couldn't presume to survive it himself (unless bunkered down and wearing a full suite of NBC protection clothing).<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I just consulted a TO&E from 1964.Apparently, one of these items was issued with each weapon. Army tests showed that they were nearly 100% effective in shielding from radiation when used properly! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
von Lucke Posted January 3, 2001 Share Posted January 3, 2001 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Jeff Heidman: Q: What is the definition of a tactical nuclear weapon? A: One that goes off in Germany. Jeff Heidman<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> What, you don't remember that crack by Al Haig (briefly Reagan's Sec. of State) about setting off a "nuclear warning shot" over England if it ever looked like the Rooskies were going to push through to the Channel? And concerning the "Davy Crockett": Ya gotta remember this thing was developed by the same military strategists who used to send Battalions out into the deserts of Nevada to witness nuclear explosions up-close-and-personal, and then have them actually advance into the fallout so they would become "acclimated" to nuclear warfare... Paging Dr. Strangelove! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sgt. Spiff Posted January 3, 2001 Share Posted January 3, 2001 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Chupacabra: ...or at least, that's what you'd have to think to fire one of these bad girls. Trust the Cold War to produce something so unbelievably stupid. Man, if you think Puppchen use is gamey now, think of how people would use these things <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Heh... Heh... Heh... I first saw this little gem at the Atomic Museum at Kirtland AFB. The Davycrocket was my favorite. My second favorite was a small device that was intended to be dropped by paratroopers as they decended into the LZ. Supposedly the nuke would clear out the LZ. These things make me wonder just how much the troops using such devices were taught about radiation. Actually I suspect that a 0.01KT device would have been reasonably safe at a mile. Unless the bomb was designed to be "dirty" it is quite plausable that the radiation yield could be very low. I'd guess that the main effect of the bomb was from concussion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts