AC, the first one, "Mike," was a cryogenic device using liquid deuterium. The lithium deuteride made a deliverable weapon practical. Heavy water won't fuse, too many oxygen atoms in the way.

Pecos,

It's amazing ain't it!

What's that old saying? "When your find yourself in a hole...STOP DIGGING!"

This kid just can't seem to put the damned shovel down...except maybe when he picks up the bottle of JD and one of his borrowed rifles.

Maybe I'll start a new thread: "So...Tell me about shovels."

Rick

H-bombs used lithium deuteride, a dry solid, as the fusible material. Deuterium is of course the "heavy hydrogen" in "heavy water." Lithium, when bombarded by neutrons, rapidly produces tritium or hydrogen-3, which is fusible.

So...like...are they reliable?

Do they...like...need lots of cleaning?

Is there...like...a big difference between US and Russian?

Oh...and most importantly...can they, like...Cook-Off?

I would especially like to hear from combat vets who have used them under a variety of field conditions under fire!

Rick

Denton,

When I said that thermo-nuclear weapons could "cook-off" I was referring not to the fissionable material but about the conventional explosives. I agree with you that it is HIGHLY improbable that one could actually achieve a thermo-nuclear cook-off. It is much more probable that the conventional high explosive charge would denotate and spread the fissionable material all over the country side, so to speak.

Additionally on the cook-off question. It is also possible, depending upon the material used to make the simple atomic bomb a thermo-nuclear device, that you could generate a steam explosion (provided that heavy water is the media used). I do not believe this to be a probable cook-off phenomena though, as I believe the conventional explosives would more than likely detonate before the temperature got high enough to generate sufficient steam pressure to burst the weapon's casing.

Thanks for sharing the story about your Father's experience too. This thread hasn't been a complete waste afterall.

ASS_CLOWN

Can they cook off? Naaahhhh.

The pieces of fissionable material have to be polished to a very fine finish, so that the mating surfaces come into intimate contact. The lensed conventional explosives that drive the pieces into intimate contact have to go off in the right timing. If one gets triggered alone, the others do no good. As the ultimate failsafe, if certain tampering conditions happen, a system squirts goo into the chamber, and the fissionable pieces can't get close enough to go bang. They're pretty safe, unless we shoot them at someone.

I'm sure the Russians have since corrected this, but they did not get the secret of the real superbomb (hydrogen). Their design was like a factor of 10 less powerful than ours.

BTW, my dad flew the B-29 out of Alaska that picked up the fallout from the first Russion nuke test. He had just gotten home, and was ready to turn in, when two MP's showed up at our home. They told him that he was going back to the base. He indicated that they should go ahead, and he would meet them there.... no, he was going with them now. The B-29 had a gizmo with a roller of filter paper, that ran in front of a slit, and had air forced through it. When they analyzed the paper, they found the fallout. Kinda big news.

Rick,

Quote:

---

So...like...are they reliable? Today's are.

< !--color-->



Do they...like...need lots of cleaning? No not really but maintenance can be high.



< !--color-->



Is there...like...a big difference between US and Russian? YES < !--color-->



Oh...and most importantly...can they, like...Cook-Off? YES < !--color-->



I would especially like to hear from combat vets who have used them under a variety of field conditions under fire!

I WOULD TOO!! < !--color-->

---

I have answered your questions, now please answer mine.



How are you again, REALLY?







ASS_CLOWN

This is getting better and better, Rick. No matter what the topic, the Ass Clown can't resist pretending he knows all about it.