ARMS-D-Request@MIT-MC.ARPA (Moderator) (12/04/85)
Arms-Discussion Digest Tuesday, December 3, 1985 8:10PM
Volume 5, Issue 39
Today's Topics:
Smuggled Nuclear Weapons
Smuggled nuclear weapons
SADMs
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 03 Dec 85 14:44:46 PST (Tue)
Subject: Re: Arms-Discussion Digest V5 #38
From: robert@sri-spam
>>
>> Date: Tue, 3 Dec 85 08:28 PST
>> From: "Morton Jim"@LLL-MFE.ARPA
>> Subject: Smuggled Nuclear Weapons
>>
>>
>> It seems to be quite possible to build Nuclear Weapons that are small.
>> I have seen models of the 155 MM Artilery Fired Atomic Projectile (AFAP)
>> and it is easy to guess that the Nuclear explosive is smaller than a
>> two-liter soda-pop bottle. While the yield of an explosive this small is
>> not great ( I would GUESS under 10 KT ) that is still enough power to
>> destroy soft targets.
Is this the same projectile assumedly used in the "Atomic Cannon" railway
gun designed in the '50s?
>> I think there are two problems with emplacement of weapons of this
>> type. The first is the lack of safety systems. It would be hard to build
>> a weapon of this type that would be impossible to detonate at will. This
>> would be a desirable terrorist bomb, one neither the U.S. or Soviet
>> government would like to see in production.
If a government were to decide to emplace such weapons on foreign soil,
it would assuradly be for immediate future use, and as such safetys
would probably be minimal
>> The second is the lack of positive control. In order to have an
>> effective attack with emplaced weapons, a large number of them need to be
>> placed in the target country. It would be fairly easy for one or more of
>> the weapons to be stolen and misused.
That depends on the objective of the blasts, see below for more. Suffice
it to say that the tactical use of nuclear weapons would probably be as
minimal as possible, since the primary intent of war is usually to obtain
the enemies resources. Blowing them up or makeing them radioactive would
not be an end in and of itself.
>> As the U.S. would seem to be more of a target for this kind of attack,
>> the Soviet Union would be sending the weapons. I do not think the Soviet
>> government trusts any one person enough to hand them a ten kiloton bomb
>> and say " Here go bury this bomb. Make sure you dont touch the red button,
>> that will set it off. " They seem to me to like more central control
>> of their Nuclear Weapons. I doubt that they would ever start handing
>> bombs out to the K G B to deliver to the U. S.
>>
>> Jim Morton
The scenario you describe is almost exactly the plot described in
Frederic Forsyths' book, _The_Fourth_Protocol_. All of FF's books
are famous for their attention to detail, and this is no exception.
Indeed, from this and other documents, it seems obvious that a determined
person(s) with access to fissionable materials could manufacture an atomic
bomb which would work, however inefficiently. _The_Fourth_Protocol
deals with an attempt to change the political situation in Britain
to favor a Russian backed Labor Party, via political unrest caused
by the supposed "accidental" ignition of an American nuclear bomb in England.
The methods of planning, infiltrating, assembling and detonating the
bomb are all described in detail in the book, and almost everything
seems quite probable. The only thing I cannot vouch for of course is
how technically accurate the description of the bomb itself is.
If there is enough interest I could type in the section on the description
of the bomb itself.
Another interesting point brought up in the book is that certain factions
on both sides are set against the use of such weapons. The reason
is that both sides could engage in massive terrorism, fairly easily,
and thus don't. A sort of "Golden Rule" of making war. Of course,
if an independant agent were to come up with the necessary materials
and expertise, it could be a different story. Particularly if the
agent didn't particularly care if he died of radiation poisoning
as a result of building the bomb (one of the major difficulties
with backyard nukes).
One last point which has yet to come up in this discussion. Obviously
the phrase "nuclear terrorism" usually refers to illicit A bombs,
but can mean other things. For instance; a large conventional
bomb detonated in an air burst over a populated area could be made
quite lethal if plutonium dust were introduced into the bomb.
Although there would be no nuclear explosion, the resultant windborn
dust would spread radaiation just as well as a nuclear explosion,
and the resultant terror would be just as great, if not greater
due simply to the quite insidiousness of the poisoning.
Disclaimer:
The opinions expressed above are solely mine, and in no way are intended
to reflect the opinions of my employer and/or clients.
Robert Allen
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 3 Dec 85 15:19:44 pst
From: Gary Chapman <PARC-CSLI!chapman@glacier>
Subject: Smuggled nuclear weapons
The United States Army already has small nuclear weapons designed to be
"smuggled" into other countries. They are the so-called "backpack nukes,"
with the official designation, SADM (and I can't remember what that stands
for). I was trained in SADM deployment when I was in Special Forces over
ten years ago. Their use is limited to specially-trained Special Forces
units.
By the way, for a (black) humorous aside: all enlisted personnel in the
military have a two-digit and one letter code for their MOS (Military
Occupational Specialty). For example, an infantryman is an "eleven-Bravo,"
for 11B. We used to say that after SADM school your MOS would be auto-
matically changed to "zero zero-X-ray."
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 3 Dec 85 15:31:44 pst
From: Gary Chapman <PARC-CSLI!chapman@glacier>
Subject: SADMs
I looked up some data on SADMs. They have a yield in the range of 0.01 Kt
to 0.25 Kt. As I recall, the backpack unit weighed about 50 lbs. It comes
in special case that I remember as being made out of fiberglas. It has
mechanical combination lock PALs, an internal timing device and some
receivers for remote firing.
SADM stands for "Special Atomic Demolition Munition." All the information
you could ever want is in Army Field Manual 9-47, "Special Ammunitions
Unit Operations."
------------------------------
End of Arms-Discussion Digest
*****************************