Thursday, December 1, 2011

Reaktor Fusi

Reaktor Fusi
Diagnostics



About 50 individual measurement systems will help to control, evaluate and optimize plasma performance in ITER and to further understanding of plasma physics.



An extensive diagnostic system will be installed on the ITER machine to provide the measurements necessary to control, evaluate and optimize plasma performance in ITER and to further the understanding of plasma physics. These include measurements of temperature, density, impurity concentration, and particle and energy confinement times.



A Bolometer Camera developed at JET. Photo courtesy:K McKormick (IPP,Garching), A Huber (FZK)
The system will comprise about 50 individual measuring systems drawn from the full range of modern plasma diagnostic techniques, including lasers, X-rays, neutron cameras, impurity monitors, particle spectrometres, radiation bolometers, pressure and gas analysis, and optical fibres.


Because of the harsh environment inside the Vacuum Vessel, these systems will have to cope with a range of phenomena not previously encountered in diagnostic implementation, while all the while performing with great accuracy and precision. The levels of neutral particle flux, neutron flux and fluence will be respectively about 5, 10 and 10,000 times higher than the harshest experienced in today's machines. The pulse length of the fusion reaction - or the amount of time the reaction is sustained - will be about 100 times longer.

Thursday, November 3, 2011

Reaktor Fusi

Reaktor Fusi

Vacuum Vessel



The large stainless steel Vacuum Vessel provides an enclosed, vacuum environment for the fusion reaction.





A cut-away of the ITER Vacuum Vessel showing the Blanket modules attached to its inner wall and the Divertor at the bottom.
The Vacuum Vessel is a hermetically-sealed steel container inside the Cryostat that houses the fusion reaction and acts as a first safety containment barrier. In its doughnut-shaped chamber, or torus, the plasma particles spiral around continuously without touching the walls.


The size of the Vacuum Vessel dictates the volume of the fusion plasma; the larger the vessel, the greater the amount of power that can be produced. The ITER Vacuum Vessel will be twice as large and sixteen times as heavy as any previous tokamak, with an internal diametre of 6 metres. It will measure a little over 19 metres across by 11 metres high, and weigh in excess of 5000 tons.



The ITER Vacuum Vessel with its 44 ports. At 8000 tons, the stainless steel vacuum vessel weighs slightly more than the Eiffel Tower.







The Vacuum Vessel will



have double steel walls, with passages for Cooling Water to circulate between them. The inner surfaces of the Vessel will be covered with Blanket Modules that will provide shielding from the high-energy neutrons produced by the fusion reactions. Some of the Blanket Modules will also be used at later stages to test materials for Tritium Breeding concepts.


Forty-four ports will provide access to the Vacuum Vessel for Remote Handling operations, Diagnostic systems, Heating, and Vacuum systems: 18 upper ports, 17 equatorial ports, and 9 lower ports.
Sumber:
Web Resmi ITER

Sunday, October 2, 2011

Reaktor Fusi

Reaktor Fusi

Magnets



The 48 elements of the ITER Magnet system will generate a magnetic field some 200 000 times higher than that of our Earth.


The ITER Magnet System comprises 18 superconducting Toroidal Field and 6 Poloidal Field coils, a Central Solenoid, and a set of Correction coils that magnetically confine, shape and control the plasma inside the Vacuum Vessel. Additional coils will be implemented to mitigate Edge Localized Modes (ELMs), which are highly energetic outbursts near the plasma edge that, if left uncontrolled, cause the plasma to lose part of its energy.



Superconducting cable being spooled after production at ASIPP, Institute for Plasma Physics, Hefei, China. Photo: Peter Ginter
The power of the magnetic fields required to confine the plasma in the ITER Vacuum Vessel is extreme. For maximum efficiency and to limit energy consumption, ITER uses superconducting magnets that lose their resistance when cooled down to very low temperatures. The Toroidal and Poloidal Field coils lie between the Vacuum Vessel and the Cryostat, where they are cooled and shielded from the heat generating neutrons of the fusion reaction.


The superconducting material for both the Central Solenoid and the Toroidal Field coils is designed to achieve operation at high magnetic field (13 Tesla), and is a special alloy made of Niobium and Tin (Nb3Sn). The Poloidal Field coils and the Correction coils use a different, Niobium-Titanium (NbTi) alloy. In order to achieve superconductivity, all coils are cooled with supercritical Helium in the range of 4 Kelvin (-269°C). Superconductivity offers an attractive ratio of power consumption to cost for the long plasma pulses envisaged for the ITER machine.
Toroidal Field System


One of the 18 Toroidal Field coils.
The 18 Toroidal Field (TF) magnets produce a magnetic field around the torus, whose primary function is to confine the plasma particles. The ITER TF coils are designed to have a total magnetic energy of 41 gigajoules and a maximum magnetic field of 11.8 tesla. The coils will weigh 6540 tons total; besides the Vacuum Vessel, they are the biggest components of the ITER machine.


The coils will be made of Cable-In-Conduit superconductors, in which a bundle of superconducting strands is cabled together and cooled by flowing Helium, and contained in a structural jacket. The strands necessary for the ITER TF coils have a total length of 150.000 kilometres and would span the earth more than three times.
Poloidal Field System



The Poloidal Field coil system consists of six independent coils placed outside the Toroidal Magnet structure.
The Poloidal Field (PF) magnets pinch the plasma away from the walls and contribute in this way to maintaining the plasma's shape and stability. The PF field is induced both by the Magnets and by the current drive in the plasma itself.


The Poloidal Field coil system consists of six horizontal coils placed outside the Toroidal Magnet structure. Due to their size, the actual winding of five of the six PF coils will take place in a dedicated, 250-metre long coil winding building on the ITER site in Cadarache. The smallest of the PF coils will be manufactured offsite and delivered finished.


The ITER PF coils are also made of Cable-in-Conduit conductors. Two different types of strands are used according to operating requirements, each displaying differences in high-current and high-temperature behaviour.
Central Solenoid


The Central Solenoid - the backbone of the Magnet system - is essentially a large transformer.
The main plasma current is induced by the changing current in the Central Solenoid which is essentially a large transformer, and the 'backbone' of the Magnet System. It contributes to the inductive flux that drives the plasma, to the shaping of the field lines in the Divertor region, and to vertical stability control. The Central Solenoid is made of six independent coil packs that use a Niobium-Tin (Nb3Sn) Cable-in-Conduit superconducting conductor, held together by a vertical precompression structure. This design enables ITER to access a wide operating window of plasma parameters, enabling the testing of different operating scenarios up to 17 MA and covering inductive and non-inductive operation.


Each coil is based on a stack of multiple pancake winding units that minimizes joints. A glass-polyimide electrical insulation, impregnated with epoxy resin, gives a high voltage operating capability, tested up to 29 kV. The conductor jacket material has to resist the large electromagnetic forces arising during operation and be able to demonstrate good fatigue behaviour. The conductor will be produced in unit lengths up to 910 metres.

Sumber:
Web Resmi ITER

Thursday, September 1, 2011

Reaktor Fusi

Reaktor Fusi
Cryostat






The entire Vacuum Vessel is enclosed within a Cryostat, or cold box, which provides insulation for the superconducting Magnet system and other components.



The ITER Cryostat will be 31 metres tall and nearly 37 metres wide.
The Cryostat is a large, stainless steel structure surrounding the Vacuum Vessel and superconducting Magnets, providing a super-cool, vacuum environment. It is made up of two concentric walls connected by horizontal and vertical ribs. The space between the walls is filled with Helium gas at slightly above one atmosphere that acts as thermal barrier. The Cryostat is 31 metres tall and 36.5 metres wide.


The Cryostat has many openings, some as large as four metres in diametre, which provide access to the Vacuum Vessel for Cooling systems, Magnet feeders, auxiliary Heating, Diagnostics, and the removal of Blanket and Divertor parts. Large bellows are used between the Cryostat and the Vacuum Vessel to allow for thermal contraction and expansion in the structures. The Cryostat is completely surrounded by a concrete layer known as the bioshield. Above the Cryostat, the bioshield is two metres thick.

Sumber:

Web Resmi ITER  

Friday, August 19, 2011

Nuclear weapon design

Pure fission weapons



The first task of a nuclear weapon design is to rapidly assemble, at the time of detonation, more than one critical mass of fissile uranium or plutonium. A critical mass is one in which the percentage of fission-produced neutrons which are captured and cause more fission is large enough to perpetuate the fission and prevent it from dying out.

Once the critical mass is assembled, at maximum density, a burst of neutrons is supplied to start as many chain reactions as possible. Early weapons used an "urchin" inside the pit containing non-touching interior surfaces of polonium-210 andberyllium. Implosion of the pit crushed the urchin, bringing the two metals in contact to produce free neutrons. In modern weapons, the neutron generator is a high-voltage vacuum tube containing a particle accelerator which bombards a deuterium/tritium-metal hydride target with deuterium and tritium ions. The resulting small-scale fusion produces neutrons at a protected location outside the physics package, from which they penetrate the pit. This method allows better control of the timing of chain reaction initiation.

The critical mass of an uncompressed sphere of bare metal is 110 lb (50 kg) for uranium-235 and 35 lb (16 kg) for delta-phase plutonium-239. In practical applications, the amount of material required for critical mass is modified by shape, purity, density, and the proximity to neutron-reflecting material, all of which affect the escape or capture of neutrons.
To avoid a chain reaction during handling, the fissile material in the weapon must be sub-critical before detonation. It may consist of one or more components containing less than one uncompressed critical mass each. A thin hollow shell can have more than the bare-sphere critical mass, as can a cylinder, which can be arbitrarily long without ever reaching critical mass.
tamper is an optional layer of dense material surrounding the fissile material. Due to its inertia it delays the expansion of the reacting material, increasing the efficiency of the weapon. Often the same layer serves both as tamper and as neutron reflector.

Gun-type assembly weapon


Diagram of a gun-type fission weapon
Little Boy, the Hiroshima bomb, used 141 lb (64 kg) of uranium with an average enrichment of around 80%, or 112 lb (51 kg) of U-235, just about the bare-metal critical mass. (See Little Boy article for a detailed drawing.) When assembled inside its tamper/reflector of tungsten carbide, the 141 lb (64 kg) was more than twice critical mass. Before the detonation, the uranium-235 was formed into two sub-critical pieces, one of which was later fired down a gun barrel to join the other, starting the atomic explosion. About 1% of the uranium underwent fission;[8] the remainder, representing most of the entire wartime output of the giant factories at Oak Ridge, scattered uselessly.[9]
The inefficiency was caused by the speed with which the uncompressed fissioning uranium expanded and became sub-critical by virtue of decreased density. Despite its inefficiency, this design, because of its shape, was adapted for use in small-diameter, cylindrical artillery shells (a gun-type warhead fired from the barrel of a much larger gun). Such warheads were deployed by the U.S. until 1992, accounting for a significant fraction of the U-235 in the arsenal, and were some of the first weapons dismantled to comply with treaties limiting warhead numbers.

Implosion type weapon

Fat Man, the Nagasaki bomb, used 13.6 lb (6.2 kg, about 12 fluid ounces in volume) of Pu-239, which is only 39% of bare-metal critical mass. (See Fat Man article for a detailed drawing.) The U-238 reflected, 13.6 lb (6.2 kg) pit was sub-critical before detonation. During detonation, criticality was achieved by implosion. The plutonium pit was squeezed to increase its density by simultaneous detonation of conventional explosives placed uniformly around the pit. The explosives were detonated by multiple exploding-bridgewire detonators. It is estimated that only about 20% of the plutonium underwent fission, the rest (about 11 lb (5.0 kg) or 5 kg) was scattered.
An implosion shock wave might be of such short duration that only a fraction of the pit is compressed at any instant as the wave passes through it. A pusher shell made out of low density metal—such as aluminiumberyllium, or an alloy of the two metals (aluminium being easier and safer to shape and beryllium for its high-neutron-reflective capability) —may be needed. The pusher is located between the explosive lens and the tamper. It works by reflecting some of the shock wave backwards, thereby having the effect of lengthening its duration. Fat Man used an aluminium pusher.
The key to Fat Man's greater efficiency was the inward momentum of the massive U-238 tamper (which did not undergo fission). Once the chain reaction started in the plutonium, the momentum of the implosion had to be reversed before expansion could stop the fission. By holding everything together for a few hundred nanoseconds more, the efficiency was increased.

Plutonium pit

The core of an implosion weapon – the fissile material and any reflector or tamper bonded to it – is known as the pit. Some weapons tested during the 1950s used pits made with U-235 alone, or in composite with plutonium,[10] but all-plutonium pits are the smallest in diameter and have been the standard since the early 1960s.
Casting and then machining plutonium is difficult not only because of its toxicity, but also because plutonium has many different metallic phases, also known as allotropes. As plutonium cools, changes in phase result in distortion. This distortion is normally overcome by alloying it with 3–3.5 molar% (0.9–1.0% by weight) gallium which causes it to take up its delta phase over a wide temperature range.[11] When cooling from molten it then suffers only a single phase change, from epsilon to delta, instead of the four changes it would otherwise pass through. Other trivalent metals would also work, but gallium has a small neutron absorption cross section and helps protect the plutonium against corrosion. A drawback is that gallium compounds themselves are corrosive and so if the plutonium is recovered from dismantled weapons for conversion toplutonium dioxide for power reactors, there is the difficulty of removing the gallium.
Because plutonium is chemically reactive and toxic if it enters the body by inhalation or any other means, for protection of the assembler, it is common to plate the completed pit with a thin layer of inert metal. In the first weapons, nickel was used but gold is now preferred.[12]

Levitated-pit implosion


The first improvement on the Fat Man design was to put an air space between the tamper and the pit to create a hammer-on-nail impact. The pit, supported on a hollow cone inside the tamper cavity, was said to be levitated. The three tests ofOperation Sandstone, in 1948, used Fat Man designs with levitated pits. The largest yield was 49 kilotons, more than twice the yield of the unlevitated Fat Man.[13]
It was immediately clear that implosion was the best design for a fission weapon. Its only drawback seemed to be its diameter. Fat Man was 5 feet (1.5 m) wide vs 2 feet (60 cm)for Little Boy.
Eleven years later, implosion designs had advanced sufficiently that the 5 foot-diameter sphere of Fat Man had been reduced to a 1 foot-diameter (30 cm) cylinder 2 feet (60 cm) long, the Swan device.
The Pu-239 pit of Fat Man was only 3.6 inches (9 cm) in diameter, the size of a softball. The bulk of Fat Man's girth was the implosion mechanism, namely concentric layers of U-238, aluminium, and high explosives. The key to reducing that girth was the two-point implosion design.

Two-point linear implosion

A very inefficient implosion design is one that simply reshapes an ovoid into a sphere, with minimal compression. In linear implosion, an untamped, solid, elongated mass of Pu-239, larger than critical mass in a sphere, is imbedded inside a cylinder of high explosive with a detonator at each end.[14]
Detonation makes the pit critical by driving the ends inward, creating a spherical shape. The shock may also change plutonium from delta to alpha phase, increasing its density by 23%, but without the inward momentum of a true implosion. The lack of compression makes it inefficient, but the simplicity and small diameter make it suitable for use in artillery shells and atomic demolition munitions - ADMs - also known as backpack or suitcase nukes.
All such low-yield battlefield weapons, whether gun-type U-235 designs or linear implosion Pu-239 designs, pay a high price in fissile material in order to achieve diameters between six and ten inches (254 mm) .

Two-point hollow-pit implosion

A more efficient two-point implosion system uses two high explosive lenses and a hollow pit.
A hollow plutonium pit was the original plan for the 1945 Fat Man bomb, but there was not enough time to develop and test the implosion system for it. A simpler solid-pit design was considered more reliable, given the time restraint, but it required a heavy U-238 tamper, a thick aluminum pusher, and three tons of high explosives.
After the war, interest in the hollow pit design was revived. Its obvious advantage is that a hollow shell of plutonium, shock-deformed and driven inward toward its empty center, would carry momentum into its violent assembly as a solid sphere. It would be self-tamping, requiring a smaller U-238 tamper, no aluminum pusher, and less high explosive. The hollow pit made levitation obsolete.
The Fat Man bomb had two concentric, spherical shells of high explosives, each about 10 inches (25 cm) thick. The inner shell drove the implosion. The outer shell consisted of a soccer-ball pattern of 32 high explosive lenses, each of which converted the convex wave from its detonator into a concave wave matching the contour of the outer surface of the inner shell. If these 32 lenses could be replaced with only two, the high explosive sphere could become an ellipsoid (prolate spheroid) with a much smaller diameter.
A good illustration of these two features is a 1956 drawing from the Swedish nuclear weapon program (which was terminated before it produced a test explosion). The drawing shows the essential elements of the two-point hollow-pit design.
There are similar drawings in the open literature that come from the post-war German nuclear bomb program, which was also terminated, and from the French program, which produced an arsenal.
The mechanism of the high explosive lens (diagram item #6) is not shown in the Swedish drawing, but a standard lens made of fast and slow high explosives, as in Fat Man, would be much longer than the shape depicted. For a single high explosive lens to generate a concave wave that envelops an entire hemisphere, it must either be very long or the part of the wave on a direct line from the detonator to the pit must be slowed dramatically.
A slow high explosive is too fast, but the flying plate of an "air lens" is not. A metal plate, shock-deformed, and pushed across an empty space can be designed to move slowly enough.[15][16] A two-point implosion system using air lens technology can have a length no more than twice its diameter, as in the Swedish diagram above.

References


Specific

  1. ^ The physics package is the nuclear explosive module inside the bomb casing, missile warhead, or artillery shell, etc., which delivers the weapon to its target. While photographs of weapon casings are common, photographs of the physics package are quite rare, even for the oldest and crudest nuclear weapons. For a photograph of a modern physics package see W80.
  2. ^ The United States and the Soviet Union were the only nations to build large nuclear arsenals with every possible type of nuclear weapon. The U.S. had a four-year head start and was the first to produce fissile material and fission weapons, all in 1945. The only Soviet claim for a design first was the Joe 4 detonation on August 12, 1953, said to be the first deliverable hydrogen bomb. However, as Herbert York first revealed in The Advisors: Oppenheimer, Teller and the Superbomb (W.H. Freeman, 1976), it was not a true hydrogen bomb (it was a boosted fission weapon of the Sloika/Alarm Clock type, not a two-stage thermonuclear). Soviet dates for the essential elements of warhead miniaturization – boosted, hollow-pit, two-point, air lens primaries – are not available in the open literature, but the larger size of Soviet ballistic missiles is often explained as evidence of an initial Soviet difficulty in miniaturizing warheads.
  3. ^ http://v3.espacenet.com/maximizedOriginalDocument?KC=A&date=19510116&flavour=plainPage&NR=971324A&locale=fr_FR&CC=FR&FT=D
  4. ^ The main source for this section is Samuel Glasstone and Philip Dolan, The Effects of Nuclear Weapons, Third Edition, 1977, U.S. Dept of Defense and U.S. Dept of Energy (see links in General References, below), with the same information in more detail in Samuel Glasstone, Sourcebook on Atomic Energy, Third Edition, 1979, U.S. Atomic Energy Commission, Krieger Publishing.
  5. ^ Glasstone and Dolan, Effects, p. 12.
  6. ^ Glasstone, Sourcebook, p. 503.
  7. a b Glasstone and Dolan, Effects, p. 21.
  8. ^ Glasstone and Dolan, Effects, p. 12-13. When one pound (454 g) of U-235 undergoes complete fission, the yield is 8 kilotons. The 13-to-16-kiloton yield of the Little Boy bomb was therefore produced by the fission no more than two pounds (907 g) of U-235, out of the 141 pounds (64 kg) in the pit. The remaining 139 pounds (63 kg), 98.5% of the total, contributed nothing to the energy yield.
  9. ^ Compere, A.L., and Griffith, W.L. 1991. "The U.S. Calutron Program for Uranium Enrichment: History,. Technology, Operations, and Production. Report," ORNL-5928, as cited in John Coster-Mullen, "Atom Bombs: The Top Secret Inside Story of Little Boy and Fat Man," 2003, footnote 28, p. 18. The total wartime output of Oralloy produced at Oak Ridge by July 28, 1945 was 165 pounds (74.68 kg). Of this amount, 84% was scattered over Hiroshima (see previous footnote).
  10. ^ "Restricted Data Declassification Decisions from 1945 until Present" - "Fact that plutonium and uranium may be bonded to each other in unspecified pits or weapons."

Friday, July 15, 2011

Nuclear Governance, control, and law




The International Atomic Energy Agency was created in 1957 in order to encourage the peaceful development of nuclear technology while providing international safeguards against nuclear proliferation


Because of the immense military power they can confer, the political control of nuclear weapons has been a key issue for as long as they have existed; in most countries the use of nuclear force can only be authorized by the head of government.[7]


In the late 1940s, lack of mutual trust was preventing the United States and the Soviet Union from making ground towards international arms control agreements, but by the 1960s steps were being taken to limit both the proliferation of nuclear weapons to other countries and the environmental effects of nuclear testing. The Partial Test Ban Treaty (1963) restricted all nuclear testing to underground nuclear testing, to prevent contamination from nuclear fallout, while the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (1968) attempted to place restrictions on the types of activities which signatories could participate in, with the goal of allowing the transference of non-military nuclear technology to member countries without fear of proliferation. In 1957, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) was established under the mandate of the United Nations in order to encourage the development of the peaceful applications of nuclear technology, provide international safeguards against its misuse, and facilitate the application of safety measures in its use. In 1996, many nations signed and ratified the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty which prohibits all testing of nuclear weapons, which would impose a significant hindrance to their development by any complying country.[8]

Additional treaties have governed nuclear weapons stockpiles between individual countries, such as the SALT I and START I treaties, which limited the numbers and types of nuclear weapons between the United States and the Soviet Union.

Nuclear weapons have also been opposed by agreements between countries. Many nations have been declared Nuclear-Weapon-Free Zones, areas where nuclear weapons production and deployment are prohibited, through the use of treaties. The Treaty of Tlatelolco (1967) prohibited any production or deployment of nuclear weapons in Latin America and the Caribbean, and the Treaty of Pelindaba (1964) prohibits nuclear weapons in many African countries. As recently as 2006 a Central Asian Nuclear Weapon Free Zone was established amongst the former Soviet republics of Central Asia prohibiting nuclear weapons.
In the middle of 1996, the International Court of Justice, the highest court of the United Nations, issued an Advisory Opinion concerned with the "Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons". The court ruled that the use or threat of use of nuclear weapons would violate various articles of international law, including the Geneva Conventions, the Hague Conventions, the UN Charter, and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

Additionally, there have been other, specific actions meant to discourage countries from developing nuclear arms. In the wake of the tests by India and Pakistan in 1998, economic sanctions were (temporarily) levied against both countries, though neither were signatories with the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. One of the stated casus belli for the initiation of the 2003 Iraq War was an accusation by the United States that Iraq was actively pursuing nuclear arms (though this was soon discovered not to be the case as the program had been discontinued). In 1981, Israel had bombed a nuclear reactor in Osirak, Iraq, in an attempt to halt Iraq's previous nuclear arms ambitions.

Disarmament proposals

Main article: Nuclear disarmament
Beginning with the 1963 Partial Test Ban Treaty and continuing through the 1996 Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty, there have been many treaties to limit or reduce nuclear weapons testing and stockpiles. The 1968 Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty has as one of its explicit conditions that all signatories must "pursue negotiations in good faith" towards the long-term goal of "complete disarmament". However, no nuclear state has treated that aspect of the agreement as having binding force.[9]
Only one country—South Africa—has ever fully renounced nuclear weapons they had independently developed. A number of former Soviet republics—Belarus, Kazakhstan, and Ukraine—returned Soviet nuclear arms stationed in their countries to Russia after the collapse of the USSR.

Uses

Apart from their use as weapons, nuclear explosives have been tested and used for various non-military uses, and proposed, but not used for large scale earth moving. When long term health and clean-up costs were included, there was no economic advantage over conventional explosives.[10]

Synthetic elements, such as einsteinium and fermium, created by neutron bombardment of uranium and plutonium during thermonuclear explosions, were discovered in the aftermath of the first thermonuclear bomb test. In 2008 the worldwide presence of new isotopes from atmospheric testing beginning in the 1950s was developed into a reliable way of detecting art forgeries, as all paintings created after that period contain traces of Cesium-137 and Strontium-90, isotopes that did not exist in nature before 1945.[11]

Nuclear explosives have also been seriously studied as potential propulsion mechanisms for space travel (see Project Orion).

Wednesday, June 15, 2011

Weapons delivery



The first nuclear weapons were gravity bombs, such as the "Fat Man" weapon dropped on Nagasaki, Japan. These weapons were very large and could only be delivered by a bomber aircraft

Nuclear weapons delivery—the technology and systems used to bring a nuclear weapon to its target—is an important aspect of nuclear weapons relating both to nuclear weapon design and nuclear strategy. Additionally, developing and maintaining delivery options is among the most resource-intensive aspects of nuclear weapons: according to one estimate, deployment of nuclear weapons accounted for 57% of the total financial resources spent by the United States in relation to nuclear weapons since 1940.[6]


Historically the first method of delivery, and the method used in the two nuclear weapons actually used in warfare, is as a gravity bomb, dropped from bomber aircraft. This method is usually the first developed by countries as it does not place many restrictions on the size of the weapon, and weapon miniaturization is something which requires considerable weapons design knowledge. It does, however, limit the range of attack, the response time to an impending attack, and the number of weapons which can be fielded at any given time. Additionally, specialized delivery systems are usually not necessary; especially with the advent of miniaturization, nuclear bombs can be delivered by both strategic bombers and tactical fighter-bombers, allowing an air force to use its current fleet with little or no modification. This method may still be considered the primary means of nuclear weapons delivery; the majority of U.S. nuclear warheads, for example, are represented in free-fall gravity bombs, namely the B61.[2]


More preferable from a strategic point of view are nuclear weapons mounted onto a missile, which can use a ballistic trajectory to deliver a warhead over the horizon. While even short range missiles allow for a faster and less vulnerable attack, the development of intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs) and submarine-launched ballistic missiles (SLBMs) has allowed some nations to plausibly deliver missiles anywhere on the globe with a high likelihood of success. More advanced systems, such as multiple independently targetable reentry vehicles (MIRVs) allow multiple warheads to be launched at several targets from any one missile, reducing the chance of any successful missile defense. Today, missiles are most common among systems designed for delivery of nuclear weapons. Making a warhead small enough to fit onto a missile, though, can be a difficult task.[2]


Tactical weapons (see above) have involved the most variety of delivery types, including not only gravity bombs and missiles but also artillery shells, land mines, and nuclear depth charges and torpedoes for anti-submarine warfare. An atomic mortar was also tested at one time by the United States. Small, two-man portable tactical weapons (somewhat misleadingly referred to as suitcase bombs), such as the Special Atomic Demolition Munition, have been developed, although the difficulty to combine sufficient yield with portability limits their military utility.[2]

Sunday, May 15, 2011

Nuclear strategy


Main article: Nuclear warfare

The United States' Peacekeeper missile was a MIRVed delivery system. Each missile could contain up to ten nuclear warheads (shown in red), each of which could be aimed at a different target. These were developed to make missile defense very difficult for an enemy country


Nuclear warfare strategy is a way for either fighting or avoiding a nuclear war. The policy of trying to ward off a potential attack by a nuclear weapon from another country by threatening nuclear retaliation is known as the strategy of nuclear deterrence. The goal in deterrence is to always maintain a second strike status (the ability of a country to respond to a nuclear attack with one of its own) and potentially to strive for first strike status (the ability to completely destroy an enemy's nuclear forces before they could retaliate). During the Cold War, policy and military theorists in nuclear-enabled countries worked out models of what sorts of policies could prevent one from ever being attacked by a nuclear weapon.

Different forms of nuclear weapons delivery (see below) allow for different types of nuclear strategy, primarily by making it difficult to defend against them and difficult to launch a pre-emptive strike against them. Sometimes this has meant keeping the weapon locations hidden, such as putting it on submarines or train cars whose locations are very hard for an enemy to track, and other times this means burying them in hardened bunkers. Other responses have included attempts to make it seem likely that the country could survive a nuclear attack, by using missile defense (to destroy the missiles before they land) or by means of civil defense (using early warning systems to evacuate citizens to a safe area before an attack). Note that weapons which are designed to threaten large populations or to generally deter attacks are known as strategic weapons. Weapons which are designed to actually be used on a battlefield in military situations are known as tactical weapons.

There are critics of the very idea of nuclear strategy for waging nuclear war who have suggested that a nuclear war between two nuclear powers would result in mutual annihilation. From this point of view, the significance of nuclear weapons is purely to deter war because any nuclear war would immediately escalate out of mutual distrust and fear, resulting in mutually assured destruction. This threat of national, if not global, destruction has been a strong motivation for anti-nuclear weapons activism.

Critics from the peace movement and within the military establishment have questioned the usefulness of such weapons in the current military climate. The use of (or threat of use of) such weapons would generally be contrary to the rules of international law applicable in armed conflict, according to an advisory opinion issued by the International Court of Justice in 1996.

Perhaps the most controversial idea in nuclear strategy is that nuclear proliferation would be desirable. This view argues that, unlike conventional weapons, nuclear weapons successfully deter all-out war between states, as they did during the Cold War between the U.S. and the Soviet Union. Political scientist Kenneth Waltz is the most prominent advocate of this argument.

It has been claimed that the threat of potentially suicidal terrorists possessing nuclear weapons (a form of nuclear terrorism) complicates the decision process. Mutually assured destruction may not be effective against an enemy who expects to die in a confrontation, as they may feel they will be rewarded in a religious afterlife as martyrs and would not therefore be deterred by a sense of self-preservation. Further, if the initial act is from rogue groups of individuals instead of a nation, there is no fixed nation or fixed military targets to retaliate against. It has been argued, especially after the September 11, 2001 attacks, that this complication is the sign of the next age of nuclear strategy, distinct from the relative stability of the Cold War.[5]