Go Back   DefenceTalk Forum - Military & Defense Forums > Global Defense & Military > Missiles & WMDs

Defense News
Land, Air & Naval Forces






Military Photos
Latest Military Pictures
Defense Reports
Aerospace & Defence


Neutron Bomb: Does any country have stockpiles of it?

This is a discussion on Neutron Bomb: Does any country have stockpiles of it? within the Missiles & WMDs forum, part of the Global Defense & Military category; Originally Posted by ever4244 The radiation is less than same power atom bomb .nealy 70% energy in N-bomb tranformed into ...


Closed Thread
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rating: Thread Rating: 2 votes, 3.00 average.
Old November 29th, 2006   #16
Senior Member
Brigadier General
No Avatar
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,590
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by ever4244 View Post
The radiation is less than same power atom bomb .nealy 70% energy in N-bomb tranformed into neutron blast. thus the shock wave and radiation dust distinguishly lower than atom-b. And N-bomb has less sequelae compare to atom -b so after half an hour your troop can march into the explosion center with proper protection.If you found your n-bomb not cleaner than atom-b maybe you get a low quality one
Huh? Neutron blast by itself cause induced radiation. And what you said about neuron bombs is even more true for regular bomb. Of course, the regular nuclear bomb will produce much more dust from burned building, etc - but its will not produce more radiation. Its very easy: both normal nuclear bomb and neutron bomb contain about the same amount of radiactive material, and produce almost the same radiation, including neutron radiation. The difference is what in normal nuclear bomb 10kg of radiacrive material produce 50kt blast, and in neutron bomb the very same 10kg produce only 0.5kt blast. Thats all.
Actually, modern fission bombs are also quite clean, and in case of usuall bursting in the air you can also walk 1 hour after the blast stright to epicentre - even after 200kt blast. Moreover, USSR used "extra" clean nuclear bombs for civilian building purposes - and in these cases the radiation after just 1 year in artificial lackes are almost as low as natural radiation.
Chrom is offline  
Old November 29th, 2006   #17
Defense Enthusiast
Corporal
No Avatar
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Beijing
Posts: 104
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chrom View Post
Huh? Neutron blast by itself cause induced radiation. And what you said about neuron bombs is even more true for regular bomb. Of course, the regular nuclear bomb will produce much more dust from burned building, etc - but its will not produce more radiation. Its very easy: both normal nuclear bomb and neutron bomb contain about the same amount of radiactive material, and produce almost the same radiation, including neutron radiation. The difference is what in normal nuclear bomb 10kg of radiacrive material produce 50kt blast, and in neutron bomb the very same 10kg produce only 0.5kt blast. Thats all.
Actually, modern fission bombs are also quite clean, and in case of usuall bursting in the air you can also walk 1 hour after the blast stright to epicentre - even after 200kt blast. Moreover, USSR used "extra" clean nuclear bombs for civilian building purposes - and in these cases the radiation after just 1 year in artificial lackes are almost as low as natural radiation.
If you count Neutron-blast into radiation then your re right for n-bomb is dedicate to neutron-blast. but the radiation I refer to it s the long term ray include X, beita, gama posed by the radiative dust.
naturely the neutron blast are clean because it dies rapidly as distance growing and only last for seconds, So the induce radiation can be partly ignore.therefore a ne-bomb is less likely to pollute water or soil. the radiation of a n-bomb instantly kill your enemy in half hour but would not hurt later comer much. As you have said the radiation total amount is nealy same compare with fissle-b----in fact is maybe even more. but the energy release stuningly strong in the form of neutron blast in short period of time and after that the radiative sequela is much less.
ever4244 is offline  
Old November 29th, 2006   #18
Senior Member
Brigadier General
No Avatar
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,590
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by ever4244 View Post
If you count Neutron-blast into radiation then your re right for n-bomb is dedicate to neutron-blast. but the radiation I refer to it s the long term ray include X, beita, gama posed by the radiative dust.
naturely the neutron blast are clean because it dies rapidly as distance growing and only last for seconds, So the induce radiation can be partly ignore.therefore a ne-bomb is less likely to pollute water or soil. the radiation of a n-bomb instantly kill your enemy in half hour but would not hurt later comer much. As you have said the radiation total amount is nealy same compare with fissle-b----in fact is maybe even more. but the energy release stuningly strong in the form of neutron blast in short period of time and after that the radiative sequela is much less.
Hmm, how you think, from where comes the radiation in the regular nuclear airbusted bomb? Only from the radioactive material in the bomb itself, including the induced radiation caused in the non-radioactive material in the bomb by the nuclear explosion. There is NO other radioactive "dust". But the source of radiation in neutron bomb just the same - the bomb itself. And even in the case of earth surface explosion, the amount of radiation produced by neutron bomb and normal nuclear bomb also the same. THE ONLY difference is what after the normal nuclear bomb explosion you will see much higher amount of radiactive dust - but the total amount of radioactive particles in the dust in both cases will be equal. This might cause bigger radioactive cloud - but again, ONLY in the case of surface explosion. Normally, almost all nuclear warheads are designed to burst high obove the surface - from 500m to about 3km. In that case there will be NO difference in radioactivity between neutron and normal bombs.

Here is the example: Normal 150kt bomb and 0.5kt neutron bomb.
Both are exploded in the center of the city, above surface.
After 150kt bomb everyone in the radious of 5km is killed by neutron radiation, everyone in the radious of 10k is killed by blast and thermal shock. There is very big radiactive cloud, the city lies in ruin.

Now after 0.5kt neuron bomb everyone in the radius of 5km killed by neutron radiation, every one in the radius of 800m killed by the blast/thermal wave. There is much smaller radioactive cloud - but the amount of radiation in that cloud is just the same as in the first case, so on average this cloud is much more radioactive. This doesnt matter much as the cloud quickly expands, and after several minutes it expand enouth to nullify any difference.
Ya, and the city is almost ok. Still, it will be the radioactive city to just the same extent as radioactiveruins in the first case.
Chrom is offline  
Old November 30th, 2006   #19
Defense Enthusiast
Corporal
No Avatar
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Beijing
Posts: 104
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chrom View Post
Hmm, how you think, from where comes the radiation in the regular nuclear airbusted bomb? Only from the radioactive material in the bomb itself, including the induced radiation caused in the non-radioactive material in the bomb by the nuclear explosion. There is NO other radioactive "dust". But the source of radiation in neutron bomb just the same - the bomb itself. And even in the case of earth surface explosion, the amount of radiation produced by neutron bomb and normal nuclear bomb also the same. THE ONLY difference is what after the normal nuclear bomb explosion you will see much higher amount of radiactive dust - but the total amount of radioactive particles in the dust in both cases will be equal. This might cause bigger radioactive cloud - but again, ONLY in the case of surface explosion. Normally, almost all nuclear warheads are designed to burst high obove the surface - from 500m to about 3km. In that case there will be NO difference in radioactivity between neutron and normal bombs.

Here is the example: Normal 150kt bomb and 0.5kt neutron bomb.
Both are exploded in the center of the city, above surface.
After 150kt bomb everyone in the radious of 5km is killed by neutron radiation, everyone in the radious of 10k is killed by blast and thermal shock. There is very big radiactive cloud, the city lies in ruin.

Now after 0.5kt neuron bomb everyone in the radius of 5km killed by neutron radiation, every one in the radius of 800m killed by the blast/thermal wave. There is much smaller radioactive cloud - but the amount of radiation in that cloud is just the same as in the first case, so on average this cloud is much more radioactive. This doesnt matter much as the cloud quickly expands, and after several minutes it expand enouth to nullify any difference.
Ya, and the city is almost ok. Still, it will be the radioactive city to just the same extent as radioactiveruins in the first case.
If 1 j energy transformed into neutron blast , it likely spend much quicker than other beta or gama ray for a single neutron can takes much more energy. So if a radiative material emit large amount of neutron , it s semi-disintegration term gets very short . You can argue that the density of neutron blast can be very low thus the energy spend slower, but that s not the case in N-bomb which is designed to emit high density neutron blast. When the radiative material disintegrated it would become harmless or continued to disintegrated into a third material.

My arguement is the radiation energy all shall come into the form of heat which is harmless. regurlar hbomb will spend it slowly in the period of week or even year when a N-bomb unleash it in few hours.

Partly I have to agree the induced radiation is an problem, but only some kind of metal can became really dangerous when most of quick Neutron dies into very slow one and before they are recaptured their energy mostly goes to heat.

BTW:Hehe arguing with you , I digged out all my highschool text book
ever4244 is offline  
Old November 30th, 2006   #20
Senior Member
Brigadier General
No Avatar
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,590
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by ever4244 View Post
If 1 j energy transformed into neutron blast , it likely spend much quicker than other beta or gama ray for a single neutron can takes much more energy. So if a radiative material emit large amount of neutron , it s semi-disintegration term gets very short . You can argue that the density of neutron blast can be very low thus the energy spend slower, but that s not the case in N-bomb which is designed to emit high density neutron blast. When the radiative material disintegrated it would become harmless or continued to disintegrated into a third material.

My arguement is the radiation energy all shall come into the form of heat which is harmless. regurlar hbomb will spend it slowly in the period of week or even year when a N-bomb unleash it in few hours.

Partly I have to agree the induced radiation is an problem, but only some kind of metal can became really dangerous when most of quick Neutron dies into very slow one and before they are recaptured their energy mostly goes to heat.

BTW:Hehe arguing with you , I digged out all my highschool text book
Hmmmmm. Look, if a "If 1 j energy transformed into heat blast , it likely spend much quicker than other beta or gama ray " as obviosly, heat doesnt add any radiation. Now, what cause more radiation and induced radiation - heat or neutrons ? Moreover, normal bomb might be even cleaner than neutron bombs as percentage of radiactive material what is converted to pure energy is higher. But thats also pure academic, as in nuclear bomb also less than 1% material converted to energy - all other turned to isotopes/remained as is. So in both cases (neutron and normal N. bombs) you will have exactly the same amount of radiactive material in the air. Again, from more logical point of view neutron bomb is of course designed to produce strong neutron wave, but its achieved in rather funny way - i.e. by underdevelopment of normal nuclear blast. Thats mean that it just CANT produce stronger neutrons wave and more radiation in general than normal bomb with the same mass.
Chrom is offline  
Old December 1st, 2006   #21
Defense Enthusiast
Corporal
No Avatar
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Beijing
Posts: 104
Threads:
No , I have to disagree

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chrom View Post
Hmmmmm. Look, if a "If 1 j energy transformed into heat blast , it likely spend much quicker than other beta or gama ray " as obviosly, heat doesnt add any radiation. Now, what cause more radiation and induced radiation - heat or neutrons ? Moreover, normal bomb might be even cleaner than neutron bombs as percentage of radiactive material what is converted to pure energy is higher. But thats also pure academic, as in nuclear bomb also less than 1% material converted to energy - all other turned to isotopes/remained as is. So in both cases (neutron and normal N. bombs) you will have exactly the same amount of radiactive material in the air. Again, from more logical point of view neutron bomb is of course designed to produce strong neutron wave, but its achieved in rather funny way - i.e. by underdevelopment of normal nuclear blast. Thats mean that it just CANT produce stronger neutrons wave and more radiation in general than normal bomb with the same mass.
No. that can produce stronger neutrons wave.
N-bomb is not completed same with normal H-bomb
1 Most H-bomb use U-238 as shell
but N-bomb use Pu-239 as shell which can produce much more neutron , So the A-bomb in N-bomb is much much more smaller than a normal bomb s A-bomb
All the radiation dust is created by A-bomb not H-bomb

2 N-bomb use an mixture of deuterium(H2) and tritium(H3) to achieve fusion
which can product much much more neutron than fission .
but normal bomb use (H2)Li as main fusion material . Li will absorb neutron to fission to H3. then H3 and H2 will fusion
but the problem is :

1) Li will absorb most of the neutron
2)Li s fission will creat radiative dust

why normal bomb dn t use H3 is because H3 is much more precious than Li

3 from the data I lean ,same 1kt bomb N-bomb detonate in 90m height s neutron blast will be 20times stronger than normal A-bomb and several

times of H-bomb. The neutron can pierce 30cm steel in 800m , however it will only pollute and destroy a radius of 180m.

ever4244 is offline  
Old December 2nd, 2006   #22
Senior Member
Brigadier General
No Avatar
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,590
Threads:
Quote:
3 from the data I lean ,same 1kt bomb N-bomb detonate in 90m height s neutron blast will be 20times stronger than normal A-bomb and several

times of H-bomb. The neutron can pierce 30cm steel in 800m , however it will only pollute and destroy a radius of 180m.

Thats right - 20 times stronger then THE SAME KT normal nuclear bomb. For exactly reason i mentioned - neutron bomb give very weak blast for its weight. But it produce about as much neutrons (and radiation afterwards) as normal nuclear bomb with the same WEIGHT and SIZE (i.e. much more that normal nuclear bomb with same KT equivalent). Allthought the exact isotopes composition is somewhat different. Thats what i tryed to explain the whole time.

Last edited by Chrom; December 2nd, 2006 at 10:36 AM.
Chrom is offline  
Old December 3rd, 2006   #23
Defense Enthusiast
Corporal
No Avatar
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Beijing
Posts: 104
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chrom View Post
Thats right - 20 times stronger then THE SAME KT normal nuclear bomb. For exactly reason i mentioned - neutron bomb give very weak blast for its weight. But it produce about as much neutrons (and radiation afterwards) as normal nuclear bomb with the same WEIGHT and SIZE (i.e. much more that normal nuclear bomb with same KT equivalent). Allthought the exact isotopes composition is somewhat different. Thats what i tryed to explain the whole time.
I ve known your arguement for long , but i beg you please read carefully my last post about why the neutron in N-bomb is more. Li will absorb most neutron in normal bomb
ever4244 is offline  
Old December 3rd, 2006   #24
Senior Member
Brigadier General
No Avatar
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,590
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by ever4244 View Post
I ve known your arguement for long , but i beg you please read carefully my last post about why the neutron in N-bomb is more. Li will absorb most neutron in normal bomb
Most - how much "most"? 10%? 30%? 90%? Keep in mind, neutron radiation have very good penetration, and merery 5 sm of any material will NOT stop most of it. Add to the fact what said Li will give strong induced radation, add what in normal nuclear bomb higher percentage of radiactive material burn in reaction - and trust me, you will got at least as much radiation in normal nuclear bomb. If you dont beleive me, take any public civil defence papier and compare the lethal radiation radius for both normal and neutron bomb. They are almost the same.
Chrom is offline  
Old December 3rd, 2006   #25
Defense Enthusiast
Corporal
No Avatar
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Beijing
Posts: 104
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chrom View Post
Most - how much "most"? 10%? 30%? 90%? Keep in mind, neutron radiation have very good penetration, and merery 5 sm of any material will NOT stop most of it. Add to the fact what said Li will give strong induced radation, add what in normal nuclear bomb higher percentage of radiactive material burn in reaction - and trust me, you will got at least as much radiation in normal nuclear bomb. If you dont beleive me, take any public civil defence papier and compare the lethal radiation radius for both normal and neutron bomb. They are almost the same.
I suggest you look up more books and come back with some more detail to support your arguement as I have done

There is vast difference between deflect and absorb . steal can only deflect neutron and you can argue neutron has a good penatration.while Li in H-bomb can absorb neutron and fission to H3.
And if there isn t enough neutron be absorbed , there won t be enough H3 to form a fusion with H2.

I said as well as book say Li will cause induce radiation and radiation dust is because that s the nature of fission. fission can not exert all the energy instantly like fusion and will produce various of radiation dust accord to different kind of initial material

The lethal radiation radius of an N bomb is much larger than A-bomb lets say the same weight---for fusion produce lot more neutron and still more than normal bomb for the neutron was not absorb by Li , and Pu can add some more.
But the remain radiation dust will be significiantly lower than A-bomb because it s not the N-bomb produce radiation dust , It s the A-bomb inside
And as I ve tell you . the Pu-bomb in N-bomb is much smaller compared with U-bomb in normal H-bomb.so the N-bomb s radiation dust lower than normal H-bomb

You can always repeat your arguement and so could I ,but that s meaning less.
ever4244 is offline  
Old December 4th, 2006   #26
Junior Member
Private First Class
Francis's Avatar
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 59
Threads:
Neutron Bombs eh? Neutron bombs, also called enhanced radiation bombs (ER weapons), are small thermonuclear weapons in which the burst of neutrons generated by the fusion reaction is intentionally not absorbed inside the weapon, but allowed to escape. The X-ray mirrors and shell of the weapon are made of chromium or nickel so that the neutrons are permitted to escape. Contrast this with cobalt bombs, also known as salted bombs.

This intense burst of high-energy neutrons is the principal destructive mechanism.

The term "enhanced radiation" refers only to the burst of ionizing radiation released at the moment of detonation, not to any enhancement of residual radiation in fallout.

A neutron bomb requires considerable amounts of tritium, which has a half-life of 12.3 years, thus making it impossible to store the weapon for more extended durations. The neutron bombs that existed in the United States arsenal in the past were variants of the W70 and the W79 designs.

An alternative technology is to enhance the x-ray yield of the weapon. Upon detonation a large electron field is allowed to hit the tungsten target, a metal slab compressed by explosives against the uranium or plutonium core. These enhanced radiation weapons are thought to comprise a true radiation damage/killing device.

This is so far only information I know about it .
Francis is offline  
Old December 4th, 2006   #27
Senior Member
Brigadier General
No Avatar
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,590
Threads:
Ok. comparasion about neutron radiation radius specially for you:

1 kt bombs, lethal radius for unprotected soldiers:

Neutron bomb: 1350
Normal nuclear bomb with SAME 1 kt power: 900

lethal radius for crew inside T-72 tank:

Neutron bomb: 720m
Normal nuclear bomb with SAME 1 kt power: 360m



As you can see, the difference is not THAT high. Neutron bomb with 1kt power have about 10kg (mainly PU) radiactive material + 10g D+T what produce most neutrons . Normal nuclear PU bomb with same weight will have 10-20 kt power - and about same lethal neutron radiation radius as 1kt neutron bomb. Now its your turn, argue these facts.
Chrom is offline  
Old March 9th, 2016   #28
Just Hatched
Private
No Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: United States
Posts: 2
Threads:
Neutron bomb use in Iraq

I would agree with what this supposed source is saying about the pulling down of the Saddam Hussein statue, but then we would both be wrong. I was there, bonehead.
Bob Hope is offline  
Old March 9th, 2016   #29
Just Hatched
Private
No Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: United States
Posts: 2
Threads:
Israel and the Geneva Convention

Quote:
Originally Posted by TrangleC View Post
Aren't they forbidden by the Geneva Convention?
Who's going to stop them from using the neutron bomb? Last I checked they are our ally, we train them.
Bob Hope is offline  
Old March 9th, 2016   #30
Defense Enthusiast
Corporal
No Avatar
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: qld
Posts: 181
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob Hope View Post
Who's going to stop them from using the neutron bomb? Last I checked they are our ally, we train them.
Bob a bit of friendly advice before you post again, take a long read of the forum rules, you have broken 3 already that the mods take a particularly strong dislike to.
Redlands18 is offline  
Closed Thread

Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:38 PM.