Nuclear bomb question…

[ben ttech]

Has anyone been able to ‘shape’ a nuclear bombs blast???


By shape I mean focusing its explosive output to any degree.

[Lrus007]

well are bunker bombs and such. shaped charges been around a while.
so i would guess yes can shape one. they are mostly lit off in the air not the ground.

[ben ttech]

I’ve never heard boo about one not having a core of fissile material that isn’t brought to criticality without a set of explosives set around it on all sides and fired simultaneously

That the Abomb

The Hbomb creates a tunnel of other materials prone to fusion right against the Abomb in its core and uses the particles that stream off the fission to bring this cylinder to fission criticality

But there isn’t a picture of either of these devices detonation as anything but an explosion which radiated in all direction equally upon detonation


I’m asking for couple reasons but I will share one now



Russia claims to have deployed a doomsday nuclear torpedo


Designed to create tidal wave


No matter what speed that torpedo is running when its warhead is detonated is going to change the fact that THAT tidal wave is going to propagate in ever planet direction


Assuming an open water situation


It could for instance slip up alongside an island thereby focusing its blasts effect to some degree


He’ll, major effect if say you managed to get it into an islands bay facing the mainland you wanted to target…

[Lrus007]

i would think so. but you could use say valleys in sea floor to get
better effect for a large wave. also could use valley on 1 side to
direct to other side to aim so to speak.

[ben ttech]

the second reason i ask is israels threat to bomb iranian nuclear instalation after iran overwhelmed their iron dome AND us navy backups with less than 200 missiles

iran had dozens of thousands and most FAR more advanced than they launched last time.


iran is the world leader in hardened concrete technology
their critical infrastructures are conventional penetrating missile proof

they sell the technology the world over

the only chance israel has in putting a dent in israel defending itself is atomic bombs

their missiles can only reach 30 or 40 feet through iranian underground defenses.
the only hope of reaching facilities 2 or 3 hundred feet deeper would be atomics

leds me to wonder if those warheads are capable of focusing their explosive impact downward...

[dill786]

Looks like TRUMP give them the red light to do this, and if he is the next president then it might just happen.

the Firdous nuclear plant is built inside a mountain so only a nuke can penetrate it, IRAN kind of hinted they have nukes or maybe RUSSIA might give them a few nuclear warheads,

Netanyahu is going to be charged with bribery, corruption so he has to stay in power, he surely can't be that fucking crazy and actually do this...

i don't know.

[ben ttech]

Nuclear bombs are not bunker busters per say

Bunker busters are missiles designed to get through a lot of rock or concrete before their bomb goes off. But Iran leads the world in high test concretes and their utilization

And I’ve not heard one word about America giving Israel bunker busters

You can bet irans nuclear industry is quite safe from even Hbomb attacks.

Sure they can mess up entrances and exits; ventilation and utilities but those will be afforded numerous redundancies so they will ride out even an American nuclear attack easily

Christ the shit floating around the maga world. Most of the retired rock climbers I jaw with are idiots

The latest is that in Israel’s bombing of beruit all its cash reserves were incinerated and a billion dollars in gold bars melted into the ground


Christ what idiots…

[Prawn Connery]

Well, on the one hand you call Trump supporters idiots, but on the other hand, you seem to believe everything Putin tells you.

I can't help you with that, but I can say that I don't believe there is currently any way to "shape" a nuclear explosion as it happens so fast, in every direction, and through almost any material at the site of the reaction.

Conventional explosives burn a lot slower and can also be "contained" by other matierials to focus predominantly in one direction.

A bullet is a great example of explosive shaping, as the charge is contained within the bullet casing – reinforced by the rifle chamber and barrel – and when it burns, it burns in a linnear fashion down the barrel, behind the projectile, pushing it out with force (expanding gases).

If you tip gunpowder out on a table and ignite it, it doesn't "explode", it burns rapidly. Different types of gunpowder burn at different rates to suit different types of projectile – mainly lighter (fast burn) and heavier (slow burn) weights so as not to cause pressure spikes that would result in an actual explosion.

But I digress. My undestanding is that while fission can be slowed down (nuclear reactor), fusion cannot – it happens almost instantly, or almost as fast as the speed of light. So I don't think you can control the "burn" rates to help with shaping.

I could be wrong. Perhaps a very dense material could be used to try to slow the reaction in one direction, forcing it in another direction.

I would be more inclined to agree with Lrus007 about using the sea bed to shape a tidal wave. I'm not just agreeing with him because he has "007" in his name.



But let's face it, Putin is as full of shit as Trump, so I wouldn't trust anything he says and I would suggest you, Ben, do the same (take everything Putin says with a pinch of salt).

[ben ttech]

when putins propaganda happens to be true,
your left with the decision

are you allegiant to your government lying propaganda,
or the truth...


and
although seabed would have some affect on the propagation of a tidal wave nuclear bomb created, say the difference between its explosion in deep water as compare to on the relatively shallow continental shelf of your target
its effect strikes me as far less advantage to targeting a tsunami as what youd get hitting the lee of a small island offshore of your intended target.

shipyard in los angeles could be subject to such a strike with a nuclear bomb detonated on the east side of a couple of its substantial offshore islands...

[Prawn Connery]

when putins propaganda happens to be true,

See? There you go again.

Admit it, you're a Russian patsy. In another thread you claimed Russia almost single handedly defeated Germany in WWII – ignoring the fact the Western Allies destroyed the Luftwaffe (it wasn't Russia) and Kriegsmarine to gain air and naval superiority, and supplied most of Russia's raw materials and advanced weapons to fight with. Not to mention destroying German armies in Africa and western Europe.

Did you know that 40% of tanks defending Moscow in 1941 were British? If it weren't for the Allies, Germany would have crushed the Soviet Union.

Anyway, believe any Putin crap you want. I don't know why you're so brain-washed, but you talk stupid shit about Russia all the time.

As for Russia's stupid nuclear torpedo, how fast does a torpedo travel and how fast can a submarine get away after firing it? Unless it is a tactical (small) nuclear device, the sub is going to go up along with everything else.

Newton's Third Law: Every action has an equal and opposite reaction. So how do you create a tidal wave in one direction without an equal and opposite reaction?

BTW, how are those "invincible" hypersonic missiles going? You swallowed that propaganda hook, line and sinker – didn't you?

And if Iran is a world leader in concreting blah, blah, how did Israel kill Hamas leaders with bunker busters?

I'm no friend of Isreal, but I'm not a fucking idiot: if the Arab world could have destroyed Israel by now, it would have. Indeed, it has already tried throughout history and each and every time has been defeated.

Are Persians (Iranians) Arabs? I don't know, but whatever – they're no match for Israel.

I really do want to be wrong about that, but it hasn't happened yet and I doubt it will.