Any nuclear technicians?

Howdy folks,

I've been doing a lot of research recently on nuclear subjects ranging from energy resources, weaponry, and history all the way back from the birth and introduction at Trinity Test site and the propulsion systems developed at the end of WWII by the German V-2, and following the Cold War all the way up to the war scare of 83'. I've seen hundreds of photos and many videos of atomic explosions and have seen this curious phenomenon in the background of many of them. You see those narrow smoke trails that are lined up in sequence to the left of the blast? I can find no explanation anywhere as to what the heck those are, does anyone here know?

I just might got the answer for you, hope it helps !!!
http://nuclearweaponarchive.org/Usa/...okeTrails.html

It looks like that's it. They even have that exact picture on there.

hey thanks!!! perfecto!

Duh, I've read all about those and never put it together in my head...sigh.

Hehe im glad o could help out :)

Wow. The things you find on the net

Wow. Thats really neat, actually. I was wondering that myself when you posted the picture, its cool to see a real explanation.

This is going to be one hell of a case mod!

That is something that I'd like to see.

Not for a mod unfortunately, another project of sorts.

Pop quiz, facing the prospect of being overwhelmed by developments by the Reagan administration during the early 1980's, the Soviets devised a "Doomsday Device" of sorts which was still in service by 1993 and likely remains in service to this day. Anyone know what it is without the use of google?

Taking a guess here but I recall something referred to as the "Czar Bomb", would that be it?
________
Cl450

I believe that would be the suitcase nuke... maybe?

nope, suitcase bombs were more tactical, doomsday devices are threat based defensive weapons.

Its true.. and purely a guess.. but didnt they have something like a dead man switch .. where if they weren't attended to for a certain amount of time they detonated? Probably just something I saw in a movie or confused with the fact that if I don't show up to work for a month, the servers develop some sort of data loss..:rolleyes:

:D

well, sort of (but it sounds like you might be thinking of the Doomsday Smoke-stack used by the Russkies in Dr. Strangelove). The reality was however, not far from the fantasy.
The Soviets were clearly falling behind in the technical advancements in the nuclear arms race by the early 1980's. The Reagan administration was losing it's healthy respect for Soviet technology with the advancement of more and more complex guidance systems and larger payloads of the upgraded Minuteman III's and Pershing II (capable of storing multiple targets in memory and having the ability to switch targets mid-flight) offensive weapons. The Soviets were being edged into a corner with such justifiably concerning language used by the CIA as "soviet leadership's decapitation", "low retaliatory likelihoods", and Pershing II's "first Strike capability". The Soviet response was an elegant and horrifying one. On November 23, 1984, a command post in Leningrad launched a test IRBM (intermediate range ballistic missile) from a test facility. This missile, without any further guidance, dispatched a valid launch code to another test missile, a silo-based ICBM (inter-continental ballistic missile) which then launched. They had developed a self-commanded nuclear arsenal with the alleged implementation of redundant arrays of code-command sequences so that individual missile removal would not trump the sequence.
As it were, the pentagon basement hosted a series a war games throughout the Cold War in which the players were hand selected intellectuals (one of which was Rod Serling) chosen by the Joint Chiefs of Staff strategic advisory technicians. The players were given feasible scenarios that were usually set 10-15 years in the future and as in some twisted form of Dungeons and Dragons the players would role play through the political and military ramifications. The purposes of the games were simply to gather as many possible scenarios and how people might handle them in the real world but the civilians seemed to handle the outcomes in a much more unfavorable manner than did the actual military leaders in the world (thank God). You can actually read the reports generated from the war games since the Freedom of Information Act has lifted the secrecy stamp on many old gov files.

I would comment more but I am still under USN clearance...

Hehe JK.

They had similar technology based in submarines. The missiles would fire even if the crew was dead. One of the first remote control of subs, but it was crude and would only navigate the ship close enough to the surface to fire. Looking for "official" reference now.

What war (or the preparation and prevention of) does to society can be a mixed blessing.

For decades the government has relied on fantasy and science fiction writers for ideas both offensive and defensive in nature. The military has hosted think tanks of scientists and Sci-fi writers alike. I remember reading an interview with Heinlein and Asimov (not the same interview) on how these sessions had influenced some of their books.

Interesting stuff Jon...

I have seen allot of this on Science HD, and The Military Channel here lately.
You may be able to download some of the the episodes.
Or look up the program showtime information for an eye full of explosions, and an ear full of information. :D

As terrifying as the Cold War was (or still is based on your definition), it ironically prevented what would have almost certainly resulted in a conventional WWIII begun in Europe between NATO and U.S.S.R. It was the nukes that made both sides afraid to make a move, which begs the question, do we have a right to force nations like North Korea avoid the development of nuclear weapons? It seems like we have no problems going to war with countries who are not armed, but we always seem to find diplomatic solutions to rivalries with nuclear adversaries.

Want to know what is really creepy, and something I didn't know until recently? Shortly after the collapse of the U.S.S.R. when most of their military command posts were abandoned by their now unemployed staff members (who for the most part stripped the posts clean of equipment and documents, but not all), extensive documentation surfaced that detailed the U.S.S.R.'s seemingly concrete plans to launch a full scale attack on western Europe with between 300-400 IRBM's followed by a conventional ground occupation force. The Soviet military were consistently trained to work and fight on an irradiated battlefield, many of their drills were carried out in full rad suits.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jdbnsn

As terrifying as the Cold War was (or still is based on your definition), it ironically prevented what would have almost certainly resulted in a conventional WWIII begun in Europe between NATO and U.S.S.R. It was the nukes that made both sides afraid to make a move, which begs the question, do we have a right to force nations like North Korea avoid the development of nuclear weapons? It seems like we have no problems going to war with countries who are not armed, but we always seem to find diplomatic solutions to rivalries with nuclear adversaries.

I do concur with this thinking. Who are we to determine, as the only country to use nukes in war time, who should and who shouldn't have these weapons.
We spend more on nuke weapons research than nuke power research (or the proper disposal of said fuel). The computing power that goes into this testing alone could be used to find cures for all kinds of ill's.

Want to know what is really creepy, and something I didn't know until recently? Shortly after the collapse of the U.S.S.R. when most of their military command posts were abandoned by their now unemployed staff members (who for the most part stripped the posts clean of equipment and documents, but not all), extensive documentation surfaced that detailed the U.S.S.R.'s seemingly concrete plans to launch a full scale attack on western Europe with between 300-400 IRBM's followed by a conventional ground occupation force. The Soviet military were consistently trained to work and fight on an irradiated battlefield, many of their drills were carried out in full rad suits.

---

I did know this. It was something that was drilled into us during my training in the military. I saw maps, photo's and intel docs that scared my 18yo ass half to death. I operated equipment on my ship that was used in part to detect missile launches. I was required to know off the top of my head the electronic signature for at least 2 dozen missiles alone. We have to talk sometime outside the uhm, tapable communication lines concerning this subject (which is probably THE main reason I did not re-up)... ;)

Wow! I'll bet you have some stories (tap..tap...). Over beers...soon.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by blueonblack

Taking a guess here but I recall something referred to as the "Czar Bomb", would that be it?

---

I missed this response. The Tsar was name of a particular mammoth H-bomb Russian design, the largest ever detonated in history. It is however very relevant to the subject though because it's design was based on the very principal that was causing the Soviets to lose the Cold War. Khrushckev and the Soviet hard-liners were so focused on the idea that bigger was better (missile envy), that they designed bombs that were not as easily deployed and thus tactically irrelevant when faced with faster, more accurate designs. Not all of their designs suffered this conceptual flaw though. Infact, again during the 1980's, there was another incident that triggered an inter-continental frenzy. The CIA noted from their satellite intelligence that very suddenly, soviet missile CEP's (circumference of error probability) began to decline which indicated that the Russians had developed a much more reliable targeting system than had the west which resulted in a panic in the US weapons designers.

Not that all US bombs were small in nature, the early H-Bomb test involved a weapon the size of a small office building. Quite comical.

Yeah, even the later H-bombs were substantially larger than their uranium counterparts.

informative.. i usually only notice the mushroom-shaped burst, not the little streaks at the side. *thumbs up*