Discussion
The 'radioactive material' thread got me browsing around remembering how to build nuclear weapons again. As always, the YouTube clips about the Russians' 'Tsar Bomba' turned up.
57 *million* tonnes of trinitrotoluene equivalent.
More recently, I've enjoyed watching ultra-slow-motion camera footage of bullets passing through various objects and substances, in incredible detail, all due to the huge strides made in video technology recently.
It's a shame that whilst the scientists were busy making the biggest bombs the world has ever seen, the camera guys didn't step up to the plate and deliver us ultra-slow-motion, super-high-resolution videos of those old thermonuclear bombs.
Am I the only nutter who wishes that we had modern footage of those old bombs in action? They're not going to be tested again, or used in anger (I hope). Certainly the Russkies' King of the Bombs won't ever be made again, it was part of a transcontinental dick swinging contest and impractical as a weapon. But I'd like to have seen *that* one - the King of the Bombs - in modern, high resolution, ultra-slow-motion video....
57 *million* tonnes of trinitrotoluene equivalent.
More recently, I've enjoyed watching ultra-slow-motion camera footage of bullets passing through various objects and substances, in incredible detail, all due to the huge strides made in video technology recently.
It's a shame that whilst the scientists were busy making the biggest bombs the world has ever seen, the camera guys didn't step up to the plate and deliver us ultra-slow-motion, super-high-resolution videos of those old thermonuclear bombs.
Am I the only nutter who wishes that we had modern footage of those old bombs in action? They're not going to be tested again, or used in anger (I hope). Certainly the Russkies' King of the Bombs won't ever be made again, it was part of a transcontinental dick swinging contest and impractical as a weapon. But I'd like to have seen *that* one - the King of the Bombs - in modern, high resolution, ultra-slow-motion video....
TVR Moneypit said:
Plotloss said:
That smashed windows 3000 miles away.
You've got to be pulling my leg?
The test firing of 50meg was also only half of what the design was capable of.
Mushroom cloud 7 times higher than Everest.
Other than Zaphod Beeblebrox, surely the best bang since the big one...
TVR Moneypit said:
cyberface said:
Plotloss said:
That smashed windows 3000 miles away.
Trinity and Beyond is worth a look if you're a fan of this sort of stuff.
Trinity and Beyond is worth a look if you're a fan of this sort of stuff.
Seismic wave measurable a few times around the Earth too. And it was an airburst, f
k knows what would have happened if they'd buried it deep underground...tstorm of seismic activitymat13 said:
TVR Moneypit said:
cyberface said:
Plotloss said:
That smashed windows 3000 miles away.
Trinity and Beyond is worth a look if you're a fan of this sort of stuff.
Trinity and Beyond is worth a look if you're a fan of this sort of stuff.
Seismic wave measurable a few times around the Earth too. And it was an airburst, f
k knows what would have happened if they'd buried it deep underground...tstorm of seismic activityWikipedia said:
The original U.S. estimate of the yield was 57 Mt, but since 1991 all Russian sources have stated its yield as 50 Mt. Khrushchev warned in a filmed speech to the Communist Parliament of the existence of a 100 Mt bomb (technically the design was capable of this yield). The fireball touched the ground, reached nearly as high as the altitude of the release plane and was seen and felt almost 1,000 kilometres (620 mi) from ground zero. The heat from the explosion could have caused third degree burns 100 km (62 miles) away from ground zero. The subsequent mushroom cloud was about 64 kilometres (40 mi) high (seven times the height of Mount Everest), which meant that the cloud was well inside the Mesosphere when it peaked. The base of the cloud was 40 kilometres (25 mi) wide. The explosion could be seen and felt in Finland[citation needed] , breaking windows there and in Sweden.[citation needed] Atmospheric focusing caused blast damage up to 1,000 kilometres (620 mi) away. The seismic shock created by the detonation was measurable even on its third passage around the Earth.[6] Its seismic body wave magnitude was about 5 to 5.25.[7] The energy yield was around 7.1 on the Richter scale but, since the bomb was detonated in air rather than underground, most of the energy was not converted to seismic waves.
It would be good to see a super slo-mo of it, I know on some video of explosions you can actually see the shockwave moving through the air.I find these kind of clips interesting
clips of the test houses and things dissapearing
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wA8z94MXo9M
clips of the test houses and things dissapearing
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wA8z94MXo9M
When that fuel depot went up in Hemel Hempstead it made a very loud bang and punched my cousins windows clean out of there mountings. (and wrecked his car as the window ended up on the roof, somehow)
He lives three miles away (in Leverstock Green if you're local) from "ground zero".
That was the biggest explosion since WW2 I heard so I can't imagine what the "king of bombs" would be like.
I like it though!
He lives three miles away (in Leverstock Green if you're local) from "ground zero".
That was the biggest explosion since WW2 I heard so I can't imagine what the "king of bombs" would be like.
I like it though!
SystemParanoia said:
they should build a 200mt bomb and detonate it on the moon.
front row seats for everyone!
As I understand it, once you get over the 10-20 megaton point, the whizzy physics stuff goes funny and it becomes impractical and very expensive to get the bang bigger, plus more is of no military use; the big russian one was just a willy waver, there was no prospect of ever making it into a usable weapon. It would require prohibitively large amounts of fissile material and a stupidly large rocket or plane to carry it.front row seats for everyone!
As to your footage of the bang; I'd be surprised if footage doesn't exist, but it's presumably still rated as secret squirrel. Equipment to do the recording like remote video is a recent innovation, so the tests up to 1963 could not be recorded up close for obvious reasons.
Gassing Station | The Lounge | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff