Nuclear Weapons

[mav1]

Since not much is going on, I thought i wuould ask about production rates of nuclear weapons. If there had been a war between the soviet's and the allies in the 1940's, the allies would have won because they had nuclear weopons? But how long would it taken to produce one nuclear bomb? Did the technology excist to mass produce nuclear bomb's in the late 1940's?

[frieze]

I don't have the materials at work but the manhattan project kept producing fissile material and bombs after the preparation of the first two bombs on a continual basis. It is safe to assume that the US could have engaged in such a war, though I don't think this is a sensible topic for this forum. One that is however is what effect tactical nukes could have in CM:SF. Assuming that one side has access to a device that, for the sake of argument, could destroy say 20% of the battlespace at one stroke. How would you alter your strategy to deal with this eventuality. At one level it would just be a form of super-artillery or super-mine, but on the other hand the EMP effects and the morale and health drop from radiation exposure and such could make for an interesting scenario.

[frieze]

Sorry for the wonky sentence structure and grammar above, I'm sneaking peeks during work hours.

[MikeyD]

I suppose a nuke strike might be able to be modeled after the fact, in the same way a strategic bombing run in CM could be simulated by setting up the scenario with already burning buildings, craters, and already supressed troops. Pretty depressing prospect, I must admit.

About nuke production, I recall hearing the plan was originally to use nukes on Nazi Germany, except the Western front collapsed before they could be employed. Also, the plan was to continue to bomb Japanese citys until they capitulated. That implies getting a third, four, and fifth bomb to the field relatively quickly. Between 1945 and -to pick a random date- 1965 hundreds if not thosands of nuclear warheads had been manufactured. It was precisely in the late 40s that traditional armies were widely considered obsolete because the Strategic Air Command with their nukes were expected to do the job.

[Dook]

The US nuclear stockpile was virtually non-existent until after 1947, when post-war production began. At the end of 1945, the US had the components for 6 weapons, but they were mostly unassembled. By the end of 1946, there were 11 weapons; by the end of 1947, 32 weapons. After production kicked in, the US had 110 in 1948 and over a thousand by 1952.

See the excellent database here.

Even if there had been more nuclear weapons available in the late 1940s, delivering them would have been problematic. Initially, the only delivery vehicle available was the B-29, which had a range of 4,000 miles. The US would therefore have to use overseas bases to launch the bombers. Once the bombers were launched, there was no guarantee they would get through in sufficient numbers to make a difference.

[MikeyD]

Well, eleven weapons is still eleven weapons. Depending on how they're used that could work out to 4 million+ dead in a day. Enough to bring most anyone to thier knees. The later Cold War practice of fielding of multiple thousands of nuclear and thermonuclear warheads saturating even the most minor targets could be considered the very definition of 'overkill'.

[mav1]

Thanks a lot Dook. That's fantastic, that's the kind of information I was looking for but could'nt find.

How much more powerful are hydrogen bomb's compared to atomic bombs?

What's the blast and radation radius of a atomic bomb compared to the blast and radation radius of a hydrogen bomb?

The scenario of american's using a nuclear bomb against the germans is an interesting one. If the Germans decided to go on fighting they would have used their nerve gas. Also they would have tried to speed up their nuclear programme. If it wasn't for Einstein, how long would have the usa's nuclear programme have been delayed?

[MikeyD]

According to Wikipedia a fission bomb can have a yield of up to five hundred thousand tons (ten billion pounds) of TNT, though it may also be significantly smaller. A fusion ('H-bomb') bomb is about a thousand times more powerful than that! It wasn't for nothing that one of the scientist at Los Alamos, when they were first placing bets on yield, bet that the atmospheric oxygen would be ignited and incinerate the globe.

Not too sure about blast radius. For nukes things get awfully tricky. Everything within LOS would be succeptable to the flash with burns and/or eye damage immediately resulting. I think during the nuke tests of the fifties soldiers would be placed within just a few miles of the detonation, but always huddled in trenches out of LOS. The troops would then be ordered to jump from their trenches and advance. One soldier's most vivid memory was the sight of blinded/burned jackrabbits on the plain jumping crazily up in the air .

[ June 29, 2006, 09:59 AM: Message edited by: MikeyD ]

[mav1]

What about chemical and biological weapons being used by Syrians in shock force?

[MikeyD]

I'm reminded of Desert Storm 1, where chemical alarms were always going off and troops were constantly struggling with their bulky chemical suits. Even if chemicals aren't actually in the game there could be a big mobility and situational awareness hit from Allied troops forced to don chemical protection as a caution.

Back to Desert Storm. Didn't the Brits come out a year or two ago with a report linking Gulf War Syndrome with trace amounts of nerve gas (either used offensively or inadvertantly blown up by the allies)? That would alter the allied casualty count for Desert Storm from the low hundereds to the tens of thousands! Even the 'easy wins' aren't easy.

[vetacon]

Originally posted by MikeyD:

It wasn't for nothing that one of the scientist at Los Alamos, when they were first placing bets on yield, bet that the atmospheric oxygen would be ignited and incinerate the globe.

What was he going to spend his winnings on?

[flamingknives]

Credit payments on the factor 1 million sunblock he'd just bought?

[Imperial Grunt]

Here is an interesting, unclassified website that predicts strike effects and blast radius.

You can see what a small 5 Kt device would do in downtown LA or New York.

HYDESim High-Yield Detonation Sim

[juan_gigante]

Originally posted by MikeyD:

I'm reminded of Desert Storm 1, where chemical alarms were always going off and troops were constantly struggling with their bulky chemical suits. Even if chemicals aren't actually in the game there could be a big mobility and situational awareness hit from Allied troops forced to don chemical protection as a caution.

Back to Desert Storm. Didn't the Brits come out a year or two ago with a report linking Gulf War Syndrome with trace amounts of nerve gas (either used offensively or inadvertantly blown up by the allies)? That would alter the allied casualty count for Desert Storm from the low hundereds to the tens of thousands! Even the 'easy wins' aren't easy.

I always thought GW Syndrome was because of depleted uranium shells, but Wikipedia thinks that nobody really knows what caused it, though we've nailed down a few possibilities.

[John Kettler]

French troops did not receive the illegal anthrax vaccine given U.S. troops and did receive the antibiotic doxycycline. The French had NO cases of GWS.

I highly recommend anyone interested in this matter visit the Gulf War Veterans of America site

at www.gulfwarvets.com Founded by Joyce Riley, formerly an Air force captain in nursing, she contracted GWS, which nearly killed her, simply by treating wounded evacuated from the Persian Gulf. The site has extensive information, can provide referrals for specialist testing, and has a wealth of material available on GWS, DU exposure, and many other matters.

Regards,

John Kettler