rteasdal@polyslo.CalPoly.EDU (Falconer) (01/15/91)
From: rteasdal@polyslo.CalPoly.EDU (Falconer)
[mod.note: Crossposted from sci.military, followups to that group.
- Bill ]
It was reported by NBC News this evening that Iraqi
television is claiming that Iraq is in possession of "A tremendously
powerful new weapon which will amaze our enemies and fascinate our
friends."
[mod.note: While not wishing to diminish the possibility or further
liken Hussein to Hitler, I'm struck by the coincidence. Readers of
50 Years Ago will note that Hitler made an almost identical statement
during the peak of the Battle of Britain, and was lying. - Bill ]
Sounds rather ominous. It reignited the running debate here
over whether or not Saddam Hussein may actually have a pocket nuclear
capability. Certainly he seems to be rather confident in the recent
game of brinksmanship - is there something we do not know about?
Questions which have arisen include the following:
(a) Iraq is in possession, almost certainly, of the
components and technology for gas-centrifuge separation of
fissionables. Are they far enough along that they might have
refined a sufficient stock for their own uses? Are there any
alternative sources of supply?
(b) It has come up in the past that the plastic
explosive Semtex is a workable base for the primary explosive
in an implosion-type plutonium fission bomb, which is what
current speculation focuses on. Semtex is a fast burner and
fires quite reliably. However, a slow burning component is
also needed. I know that in the Manhattan project devices the
slow compound was Baratol. Does anyone know if it's still in
use, or what precisely it is that makes it slow? Is there a
more modern substitute or can something like Semteex be
chemically doctored to serve in this role? I believe
the rationale for the presence of the slow burning pieces is
to increase the index of refraction and more sharply focus
the implosion wave on the fissionable sphere at the center.
How this is done and the math behind it are shrouded in
considerable mystery.
(c) What about timers and detonators? I have heard it
mentioned on the net that rapid-discharge capacitors of the
type required in a firing mechanism are nowadays used in
Xerox copiers - in short, a widely disseminated technology.
Also, it would seem that detonators of the type used in the
demolition of large urban skyscrapers, where the building is
made to fall in on itself by very precisely controlled and
timed blasts, would be well suited to a nuclear role.
(d) Beryllium, as a neutron reflector, is probably a
fairly integral part of anyone's bomb design. I believe there
would be a sphere of it at the heart of the core, with the
plutonium sphere surrounding that and a thin shell of Be
between the outer surface of the Pu and the inner surface of
the explosive lenses. But Be is apparently a bitch to work
with. Is it feasible for a Second World country, albeit one
with substantial outside assistance, to properly machine
beryllium castings?
(e) I certainly hope we don't find out the answers
to all these questions on the fifteenth or soon thereafter.
--
|||||| Russ Teasdale -- rteasdal@polyslo.CalPoly.EDU -- (Falconer) |||||||
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Gentlemen, if we do not succeed, then we run the risk of failure." - D. Quayle