Dont worry lads - We've got the bomb...

What do you think of the Nuclear bomb?


  • Total voters
    83

MIghtyG

Well-known Member
I was watching a documentry yesterday on the testing and development of the Nuclear bomb and it really was terrifying watching the amount of destruction that these things can produce.

The largest bomb detonated was the equivalent of 600'000'000-Tons of TNT, the explosion actually vaporised an island during the testing and left a crater kilometers deep.

So what are peoples opinions on the A-Bomb? do you think its something we should be keeping either to use in anger or as a deterrent? or do you think we should be banning and getting rid of them? or is pandora's box already open?
 

EarthRod

Distinguished Member
This is a bit of an explosive issue! :D

However, if you've got it, flaunt it. Deterrent value is very high.
 

Ed Selley

AVF Reviewer
If you find this interesting, get hold of a copy of this book. Really well written, darkly funny and fascinating stuff.
 

shodan

Distinguished Member
It's all about the MAD. If it was banned then some people would still develop it but we wouldn't have a deterrent to stop them from using it.
I'm also interested in learning about the H Bomb and the Neutron Bomb if anyone knows of any links to easiest to understand explanations..
 

Bob

Novice Member
I can't see the point of having it. The Human Rights Act will stop us using it no doubt.
 

imightbewrong

Distinguished Member
The largest bomb detonated was the equivalent of 600'000'000-Tons of TNT, the explosion actually vaporised an island during the testing and left a crater
Which bomb was that then? I thought the biggest was the Tsar Bomba which went off at an altitude of 8 Km
 

Ed Selley

AVF Reviewer
It's all about the MAD. If it was banned then some people would still develop it but we wouldn't have a deterrent to stop them from using it.
I'm also interested in learning about the H Bomb and the Neutron Bomb if anyone knows of any links to easiest to understand explanations..
Actually, the wiki entries for both aren't bad. The book I linked to puts their development in the context of the strategy and thinking at the time- the neutron bomb argument went on for several decades.
 

EarthRod

Distinguished Member
The largest bomb detonated was the equivalent of 600'000'000-Tons of TNT, the explosion actually vaporised an island during the testing and left a crater kilometers deep.
Where did you get that figure from?

The largest bomb detonated by the Soviets was approx 50Mt (50,000,000 tons equiv of TNT). Detonated in the air above an island, but the island was not obliterated (-ish!)
 

MIghtyG

Well-known Member
My misstake entirely, The Tsar bomb was 50 megatons, for some reason I had 600 megatons in my head!!

And the bomb that vaporised an island was Castle bravo which was only 15 megatons, detonated on land on the Bikini Atoll islands.

Just got my bombs mixed up a tad
 

imightbewrong

Distinguished Member
Where did you get that figure from?

The largest bomb detonated by the Soviets was approx 50Mt (50,000,000 tons equiv of TNT). Detonated in the air above an island, but the island was not obliterated (-ish!)
Yep - when they got to 50 they figured out it wasn't worth having big ones - you could do way more damage with 50x1Mt bombs than 1x50Mt bomb. Think hitting the 50 biggest UK towns with 1Mt bombs, or the top 10 with 5, or every major city in Europe, vs hitting London with one ****** of a bomb.
 

Singh400

Distinguished Member
Ideally, I'd get rid of them all and dismantle everyones stockpile. Realistically they are still used as deterrents.
 

imightbewrong

Distinguished Member
And today's No **** Sherlock award goes to....
 

technoman28

Well-known Member
This is a very difficult one. In theory the nations that have them would not use them, they are there as a last line of defence. The only groups that I could see using them (if they had them) are terrorist groups going for the kill as many people as you can wow factor. I like to believe that none of the nations that have them at the moment would even think of using them and have them as a deterrent.

Everyone can see (through documentaries etc) what these things can do, and predictions of what effects dropping one on various places are openly available. If you study these, you ask yourself why would you do this to anyone? The victims would be almost all civilians who have no real say in what their country is doing.

But if you don't have them, are you leaving yourself open to lesser forms of attack? The only way out is if everyone were to get rid of theirs so no-one has any, but methinks that may be to much to ask.

I have thought about this many times over the years and come to the conclusion that 1: nobody that has them would dare use them. and 2: nobody that has them would dare get rid of them. The ultimate catch 22 situation.
 

Greg Hook

Moderator & Reviewer
I'm also interested in learning about the H Bomb and the Neutron Bomb if anyone knows of any links to easiest to understand explanations..
Found loads with a quick search on google and also from Wiki. It seems to me that a neutron bomb is designed to release all its energy as radiation rather than explosive. Used to penetrate buildings, vehicles etc which would normally be protected from explosive energy.

Always remember one of the Halloween Simpson's episodes where Homer was viewing a bomb shelter just as Springfield was hit by a neutron bomb sent from France. :D
 

EarthRod

Distinguished Member
Yep - when they got to 50 they figured out it wasn't worth having big ones - you could do way more damage with 50x1Mt bombs than 1x50Mt bomb. Think hitting the 50 biggest UK towns with 1Mt bombs, or the top 10 with 5, or every major city in Europe, vs hitting London with one ****** of a bomb.
Yes. Also the 50Mt big ******* had to be carried by a large aircraft flying VERY high - so all the eggs in one basket, as it were. The 1Mt bombs could be directed (soon as they found a method that fixed the targeting errors!) by missiles.
 

MIghtyG

Well-known Member
I thought the idea behind them was that bombers were slow and easy targets so if they could get one through and got it reasonably close to the target it would completely obliterate it rather than having to hit it with a minimum of 10-25 smaller bombs?

I think that they are generally horrible pieces of technology though and I wish we never invented them, the destructive capability of them is just far too frighting to even comprehend, just to think that one of these 50-100 megaton bombs could wipe out an entire city and prevent people from living there for decades to come.

I agree that most sane super powers would never use them, you just need to look at the backlash the Americans got for dropping them on Japan and the fallout from Castle bravo to see what the public opinion is of them, even from the aggressor side. As has been said before the only people I can see using these things are small terrorist groups and I cant see them getting the technology to build a proper Nuclear bomb but rather a smaller 'dirty' bomb.

But we have opened Pandora's box and are going to struggle to close it, if ever.

The super powers that have them are unlikely to ever use them
The super powers that have them are unlikely to ever get rid of them if someone else has them
The only people that would use them are virtually impossible to retaliate against with one

The only people I can see them really deterring are the people that arent likely to ever use them but theres always that chance I guess.....

I really dont know what to think tbh.
 

Bob

Novice Member
If you can't see a point of having it, do you not agree that it is a deterrent?
I don't think it's a deterrent because I think other countries will be well aware that we will never use it.

I don't ever see this country having a leader who would be strong enough to give the order until it was too late, and a nuke was already heading this way.
 

shodan

Distinguished Member
Black sheep boy said:
I don't think it's a deterrent because I think other countries will be well aware that we will never use it.

I don't ever see this country having a leader who would be strong enough to give the order until it was too late, and a nuke was already heading this way.
Your 2nd point there is the whole point of having then. Mutual Assured Destruction. You nuke us and you die too. No one wins. And I don't agree with your 1st point, as it ties in wit the second one.
 

The latest video from AVForums

Podcast: Marantz SR7015 & NAD T 778 AVR + Mission LX2 MKII Speaker Reviews, AV & Film News and More

Latest News

Humax launches AURA 4K Freeview Play Recorder
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
Fyne Audio adds new standmounts to F1 speaker range
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
Mark Levinson expands 5000 Series with amplifiers and players
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
AVForums Podcast: 14th October 2020
  • By Phil Hinton
  • Published
Sony launches Apple TV app on XH90 TVs
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
Top Bottom