Wikipedia

Neutron bomb

Energy distribution of weapon
Energy type Proportion of total energy (%)
Fission Enhanced
Blast 50 40[1]to minimum 30[2]
Thermal energy 35 25[1]to minimum 20[2]
Prompt radiation 5 45 to minimum 30[1]
Residual radiation 10 5[1]

Aneutron bomb,officially defined as a type ofenhanced radiation weapon(ERW), is a low-yieldthermonuclear weapondesigned to maximize lethalneutron radiationin the immediate vicinity of the blast while minimizing the physical power of the blast itself. The neutron release generated by anuclear fusionreaction is intentionally allowed to escape the weapon, rather than being absorbed by its other components.[3]The neutron burst, which is used as the primary destructive action of the warhead, is able to penetrate enemy armor more effectively than a conventional warhead, thus making it more lethal as a tactical weapon.

The concept was originally developed by the United States in the late 1950s and early 1960s. It was seen as a "cleaner" bomb for use against massedSovietarmored divisions. As these would be used over allied nations, notablyWest Germany,the reduced blast damage was seen as an important advantage.[4][5]

ERWs were first operationally deployed foranti-ballistic missiles(ABMs). In this role, the burst of neutrons would cause nearby warheads to undergo partial fission, preventing them from exploding properly. For this to work, the ABM would have to explode within approximately 100 metres (300 ft) of its target. The first example of such a system was theW66,used on theSprintmissile used in the USNike-Xsystem. It is believed the Soviet equivalent, theA-135's53T6missile, uses a similar design.[6][7]

The weapon was once again proposed for tactical use by the United States in the 1970s and 1980s, and production of theW70began for theMGM-52 Lancein 1981. This time, it led to protests as the growinganti-nuclear movementgained strength through this period. Opposition was so intense that European leaders refused to accept it on their territory. US PresidentRonald Reaganordered the production of the W70-3, which remained in the US stockpile until they were retired in 1992. The last W70 was dismantled in February 1996.[8]

Basic concept

edit

In a standard thermonuclear design, a smallfission bombis placed close to a larger mass of thermonuclear fuel, usually lithium deuteride. The two components are then placed within a thickradiation case,usually made fromuranium,lead,or steel. The case traps the energy from the fission bomb for a brief period, allowing it to heat and compress the main thermonuclear fuel. The case is normally made ofdepleted uraniumornatural uraniummetal, because the thermonuclear reactions give off extraordinarily large numbers of high-energyneutronsthat can cause fission reactions in the casing material. These can add considerable energy to the reaction; in a typical design, as much as 50% of the total energy comes from fission events in the casing. For this reason, these weapons are technically known as fission-fusion-fission designs.

In a neutron bomb, the casing material is selected either to be transparent to neutrons or to actively enhance their production. The burst of neutrons created in the thermonuclear reaction is then free to escape the bomb, outpacing the physical explosion. By designing the thermonuclear stage of the weapon carefully, the neutron burst can be maximized while minimizing the blast itself. This makes the lethal radius of the neutron burst greater than that of the explosion itself. Since the neutrons are absorbed or decay rapidly, such a burst over an enemy column would kill the crews but leave the area able to be quickly reoccupied.

Compared to a purefission bombwith an identical explosive yield, a neutron bomb would emit about ten times[9]the amount of neutron radiation. In a fission bomb, at sea level, the total radiation pulse energy which is composed of bothgamma raysand neutrons is approximately 5% of the entire energy released; in neutron bombs, it would be closer to 40%, with the percentage increase coming from the higher production of neutrons. Furthermore, the neutrons emitted by a neutron bomb have a much higher average energy level (close to 14 MeV) than those released during a fission reaction (1–2 MeV).[10]

Technically speaking, every low-yield nuclear weapon is a radiation weapon, including non-enhanced variants. All nuclear weapons up to about 10 kilotons in yield have prompt neutron radiation[2]as their furthest-reaching lethal component. For standard weapons above about 10 kilotons of yield, the lethal blast and thermal effects radius begins to exceed the lethalionizing radiationradius.[11][12][13]Enhanced radiation weapons also fall into this same yield range and simply enhance the intensity and range of the neutron dose for a given yield.

History and deployment to present

edit

The conception of neutron bombs is generally credited toSamuel T. Cohenof theLawrence Livermore National Laboratory,who developed the concept in 1958.[14]Initial development was carried out as part of projects Dove and Starling, and an early device was tested underground in early 1962. Designs for a "weaponized" version were developed in 1963.[15][16]

Development of two production designs for the Army'sMGM-52 Lanceshort-range missile began in July 1964, theW63at Livermore and theW64atLos Alamos.Both entered phase three testing in July 1964, and the W64 was cancelled in favor of the W63 in September 1964. The W63 was in turn cancelled in November 1965 in favor of theW70(Mod 0), a conventional design.[15]By this time, the same concepts were being used to develop warheads for theSprint missile,ananti-ballistic missile(ABM), with Livermore designing theW65and Los Alamos theW66.Both entered phase three testing in October 1965, but the W65 was cancelled in favor of the W66 in November 1968. Testing of the W66 was carried out in the late 1960s, and it entered production in June 1974,[15]the first neutron bomb to do so. Approximately 120 were built, with about 70 of these being on active duty during 1975 and 1976 as part of theSafeguard Program.When that program was shut down they were placed in storage, and eventually decommissioned in the early 1980s.[15]

Development of ER warheads for Lance continued, but in the early 1970s, attention had turned to using modified versions of the W70, the W70 Mod 3.[15]Development was subsequently postponed by PresidentJimmy Carterin 1978 following protests against his administration's plans to deploy neutron warheads to ground forces in Europe.[17]OnNovember 17, 1978,in a test, theUSSRdetonated its first similar-type bomb.[citation needed]PresidentRonald Reaganrestarted production in 1981.[17]The Soviet Union renewed apropagandacampaign against the US's neutron bomb in 1981 following Reagan's announcement. In 1983, Reagan then announced theStrategic Defense Initiative,which surpassed neutron bomb production in ambition and vision and with that, neutron bombs quickly faded from the center of the public's attention.[citation needed]

Attempted warhead replacement programs
Initial Enhanced Gun caliber
W48 W82 155 mm
W33 W79 203mm

Three types of enhanced radiation weapons (ERW) were deployed by the United States.[18]The W66 warhead, for the anti-ICBM Sprint missile system, was deployed in 1975 and retired the next year, along with the missile system. The W70 Mod 3 warhead was developed for the short-range, tactical MGM-52 Lance missile, and theW79 Mod 0was developed fornuclear artilleryshells. The latter two types were retired by PresidentGeorge H. W. Bushin 1992, following the end of theCold War.[19][20]The last W70 Mod 3 warhead was dismantled in 1996,[21]and the last W79 Mod 0 was dismantled by 2003, when the dismantling of all W79 variants was completed.[22]

According to theCox Report,as of 1999, the United States had never deployed a neutron weapon. The nature of this statement is not clear; it reads, "The stolen information also includes classified design information for an enhanced radiation weapon (commonly known as the" neutron bomb "), which neither the United States, nor any other nation, has ever deployed."[23]However, the fact that neutron bombs had been produced by the US was well known at this time and part of the public record. Cohen suggests the report is playing with the definitions; while the US bombs were never deployedto Europe,they remained stockpiled in the US.[24]

In addition to the two superpowers, France and China are known to have tested neutron or enhanced radiation bombs. France conducted an early test of the technology in 1967[25]and tested an actual neutron bomb in 1980.[26]China conducted a successful test of neutron bomb principles in 1984 and a successful test of a neutron bomb in 1988. However, neither of those countries chose to deploy neutron bombs. Chinese nuclear scientists stated before the 1988 test that China had no need for neutron bombs, but it was developed to serve as a "technology reserve", in case the need arose in the future.[27]

In May 1998, Senior Pakistani Scientist, Dr. N. M. Butt, stated that "PAEC built a sufficient number of neutron bombs—a battlefield weapon that is essentially a low yield device".[28]

In August 1999, the Indian government stated that India was capable of producing a neutron bomb.[29]

Although no country is currently known to deploy them in an offensive manner, all thermonucleardial-a-yieldwarheads that have about 10 kiloton and lower as one dial option, with a considerable fraction of that yield derived from fusion reactions, can be considered able to be neutron bombs in use, if not in name. The only country definitely known to deploy dedicated (that is, not dial-a-yield) neutron warheads for any length of time is the Soviet Union/Russia,[6]which inherited the USSR's neutron warhead equippedABM-3 Gazellemissile program. This ABM system contains at least 68 neutron warheads with a 10-kiloton yield each and it has been in service since 1995, with inert missile testing approximately every other year since then (2014). The system is designed to destroy incoming endoatmospheric nuclear warheads aimed atMoscowand other targets and is the lower-tier/last umbrella of theA-135 anti-ballistic missile system(NATO reporting name: ABM-3).[7]

By 1984, according toMordechai Vanunu,Israel was mass-producing neutron bombs.[30]

Considerable controversy arose in the US and Western Europe following a June 1977Washington Postexposé describing US government plans to equip US Armed Forces with neutron bombs. The article focused on the fact that it was the first weapon specifically intended to kill humans with radiation.[31][32]Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory directorHarold Brownand Soviet General SecretaryLeonid Brezhnevboth described neutron bombs as a "capitalist bomb", because it was designed to destroy people while preserving property.[33][34][need quotation to verify]

Use

edit
The 1979 Soviet/Warsaw Pact invasion plan, "Seven Days to the River Rhine"to seizeWest Germanyin the event of a nuclear attack on Poland by NATO forces. Soviet analysts had correctly assumed that the NATO response would be to use regulartactical nuclear weaponsto stop such a massive Warsaw Pact invasion.[35]According to proponents, neutron bombs would blunt an invasion by Soviet tanks and armored vehicles without causing as much damage or civilian deaths as the older nuclear weapons would.[4]Neutron bombs would have been used if theREFORGERconventional response ofNATOto the invasion was too slow or ineffective.[4][36]

Neutron bombs are purposely designed with explosive yields lower than other nuclear weapons. Since neutrons are scattered and absorbed by air,[2]neutron radiation effects drop off rapidly with distance in air. As such, there is a sharper distinction, relative to thermal effects, between areas of high lethality and areas with minimal radiation doses.[3]No high yield (more than c. 10kiloton) nuclear bombs, including the extreme example of the 50megatonTsar Bomba,are able to radiate sufficient neutrons beyond their lethal blast range when detonated as a surface burst or low altitudeair burstand so are not classified as neutron bombs, thus limiting the yield of neutron bombs to a maximum of about 10 kilotons. The intensepulseof high-energy neutrons generated by a neutron bomb is the principal killing mechanism, not the fallout, heat or blast.

The inventor of the neutron bomb, Sam Cohen, criticized the description of the W70 as a neutron bomb since it could be configured to yield 100 kilotons:

the W-70... is not even remotely a "neutron bomb." Instead of being the type of weapon that, in the popular mind, "kills people and spares buildings" it is one that both kills and physically destroys on a massive scale. The W-70 is not a discriminate weapon, like the neutron bomb—which, incidentally, should be considered a weapon that "kills enemy personnel while sparing the physical fabric of the attacked populace, and even the populace too."[37]

Although neutron bombs are commonly believed to "leave the infrastructure intact", with current designs that have explosive yields in the low kiloton range,[38]detonation in (or above) a built-up area would still cause a sizable degree of building destruction, through blast and heat effects out to a moderate radius, albeit considerably less destruction, than when compared to a standard nuclear bomb of theexactsame total energy release or "yield".[39]

U.S. ArmyM110 howitzersin a 1984 REFORGER staging area before transport. This dual capable system could fire nuclear artillery shells.[40][41]

TheWarsaw Pact tank strength was over twice that of NATO,andSoviet deep battle doctrinewas likely to be to use this numerical advantage to rapidly sweep across continental Europe if the Cold War ever turned hot. Any weapon that could break up their intended mass tank formation deployments and force them to deploy their tanks in a thinner, moreeasily dividable manner,[4]would aid ground forces in the task of hunting down solitary tanks and usinganti-tank missilesagainst them,[42]such as the contemporaryM47 DragonandBGM-71 TOWmissiles, of which NATO had hundreds of thousands.[4]

Rather than making extensive preparations for battlefield nuclear combat in Central Europe, the Soviet military leadership believed that conventional superiority provided the Warsaw Pact with the means to approximate the effects of nuclear weapons and achieve victory in Europe without resort to those weapons.[43]

Neutron bombs, or more precisely, enhanced [neutron] radiation weapons were also to find use as strategic anti-ballistic missile weapons,[39]and in this role, they are believed to remain in active service within Russia's Gazelle missile.[6]

Effects

edit
A wooden framed house photographed during a 1953 nuclear test, 5 pounds per square inch (34 kPa) overpressure, full collapse.

Upon detonation, a near-groundairburstof a 1-kiloton neutron bomb would produce a large blast wave and a powerful pulse of both thermal radiation andionizing radiationin the form of fast (14.1MeV) neutrons. The thermal pulse would causethird degree burnsto unprotected skin out to approximately 500 meters. The blast would create pressures of at least 4.6psi (32 kPa) out to a radius of 600 meters, which would severely damage all non-reinforced concrete structures. At the conventional effective combat range against modernmain battle tanksandarmored personnel carriers(<690–900m), the blast from a 1kt neutron bomb would destroy or damage to the point of nonusability almost all un-reinforced civilian buildings.[citation needed]

Using neutron bombs to stop an enemy armored attack by rapidly incapacitating crews with a dose of 80+Gyof radiation[44]would require exploding large numbers of them to blanket the enemy forces, destroying all normal civilian buildings within c.600 meters of the immediate area.[44][45]Neutron activationfrom the explosions could make many building materials in the city radioactive, such asgalvanized steel(seearea denial usebelow).

Because liquid-filled objects like the human body are resistant to gross overpressure, the 4–5psi (28-34 kPa) blastoverpressurewould cause very few direct casualties at a range of c.600m. The powerful winds produced by this overpressure, however, could throw bodies into objects or throw debris at high velocity, including window glass, both with potentially lethal results. Casualties would be highly variable depending on surroundings, including potential building collapses.[46]

The pulse of neutron radiation would cause immediate and permanent incapacitation to unprotected outdoor humans in the open out to 900 meters,[9]with death occurring in one or two days. Themedian lethal dose(LD50) of 6 Gray would extend to between 1350 and 1400 meters for those unprotected and outdoors,[44]where approximately half of those exposed would die of radiation sickness after several weeks.

A human residing within, or simply shielded by, at least one concrete building with walls and ceilings 30 cm (12 in) thick, or alternatively of dampsoil24 inches (60 cm) thick, would receive a neutron radiation exposure reduced by a factor of 10.[47][48]Even near ground zero, basement sheltering or buildings with similar radiation shielding characteristics would drastically reduce the radiation dose.[4]

Furthermore, theneutron absorptionspectrum of air is disputed by some authorities, and depends in part on absorption byhydrogenfromwater vapor.Thus, absorption might vary exponentially with humidity, making neutron bombs far more deadly indesert climatesthan in humid ones.[44]

Effectiveness in modern anti-tank role

edit
See also:Centurion Tank § Nuclear tests,Object 279,andSigns and symptoms of radiation poisoning § "Walking Ghost phase"
Theneutron cross sectionand absorption probability inbarnsof the two naturalboronisotopes found in nature (top curve is for 10 B and bottom curve for 11 B. As neutron energy increases to 14 MeV, the absorption effectiveness, in general, decreases. Thus, for boron-containing armor to be effective, fast neutrons must first be slowed by another element byneutron scattering.

The questionable effectiveness of ER weapons against modern tanks is cited as one of the main reasons that these weapons are no longer fielded orstockpiled.With the increase in average tank armor thickness since the first ER weapons were fielded, it was argued in the March 13, 1986,New Scientistmagazine that tank armor protection was approaching the level where tank crews would be almost fully protected from radiation effects. Thus, for an ER weapon to incapacitate a modern tank crew through irradiation, the weapon must be detonated at such proximity to the tank that thenuclear explosion's blast would now be equally effective at incapacitating it and its crew.[49]

However, although the author did note that effectiveneutron absorbersandneutron poisonssuch asboron carbidecan be incorporated into conventional armor and strap-onneutron moderatinghydrogenous material (substances containing hydrogen atoms), such as explosivereactive armor,increasing the protection factor, the author holds that in practice, combined withneutron scattering,the actual average total tank area protection factor is rarely higher than 15.5 to 35.[50]According to theFederation of American Scientists,the neutron protection factor of a "tank" can be as low as 2,[2]without qualifying whether the statement implies alight tank,medium tank,ormain battle tank.

A compositehigh-density concrete,or alternatively, a laminatedgraded-Z shield,24 units thick of which 16 units are iron and 8 units arepolyethylenecontaining boron (BPE), and additional mass behind it to attenuate neutron capture gamma rays, is more effective than just 24 units of pure iron or BPE alone, due to the advantages of both iron and BPE in combination. Duringneutron transport,iron is effective in slowing down/scattering high-energy neutrons in the 14-MeV energy range and attenuating gamma rays, while the hydrogen in polyethylene is effective in slowing down these now slowerfast neutronsin the few MeV range, and boron 10 has a high absorption cross section forthermal neutronsand a low production yield of gamma rays when it absorbs a neutron.[51][52][53]The SovietT-72tank, in response to the neutron bomb threat, is cited as having fitted a boronated[54]polyethylene liner, which has had its neutron shielding properties simulated.[48][55]

Theradiation weighting factorfor neutrons of various energy has been revised over time and certain agencies have different weighting factors; however, despite the variation amongst the agencies, from the graph, for a given energy, afusion neutron(14.1 MeV) although more energetic, is less biologically harmful as rated inSieverts,than a fission-generated thermal neutron or a fusion neutron slowed to that energy, c. 0.8 MeV.

However, some tank armor material containsdepleted uranium(DU), common in the US'sM1A1 Abramstank, which incorporates steel-encased depleted uranium armor,[56]a substance that will fast fission when itcapturesa fast, fusion-generated neutron, and thus on fissioning will producefission neutronsandfission productsembedded within the armor, products which emit, among other things, penetrating gamma rays. Although the neutrons emitted by the neutron bomb may not penetrate to the tank crew in lethal quantities, the fast fission of DU within the armor could still ensure a lethal environment for the crew and maintenance personnel by fission neutron and gamma ray exposure[dubious–discuss],[57][unreliable source?]largely depending on the exact thickness and elemental composition of the armor—information usually hard to attain. Despite this,Ducrete—which has an elemental composition similar (but not identical) to the ceramicsecond-generation heavy metal Chobham armorof the Abrams tank—is an effective radiation shield, to bothfissionneutrons and gamma rays due to it being a graded-Z material.[58][59]Uranium, being about twice as dense as lead, is thus nearly twice as effective at shielding gamma ray radiation per unit thickness.[60]

Use against ballistic missiles

edit

As an anti-ballistic missile weapon, the first fielded ER warhead, the W66, was developed for the Sprint missile system as part of the Safeguard Program to protect United States cities andmissile silosfrom incoming Soviet warheads.

A problem faced by Sprint and similar ABMs was that the blast effects of their warheads change greatly as they climb and the atmosphere thins out. At higher altitudes, starting around 60,000 feet (18,000 m) and above, the blast effects begin to drop off rapidly as the air density becomes very low. This can be countered by using a larger warhead, but then it becomes too powerful when used at lower altitudes. An ideal system would use a mechanism that was less sensitive to changes in air density.

Neutron-based attacks offer one solution to this problem. The burst of neutrons released by an ER weapon can induce fission in the fissile materials of primary in the target warhead. The energy released by these reactions may be enough to melt the warhead, but even at lower fission rates, the "burning up" of some of the fuel in the primary can cause it to fail to explode properly, or "fizzle".[61]Thus, a small ER warhead can be effective across a wide altitude band, using blast effects at lower altitudes and the increasingly long-ranged neutrons as the engagement rises.

The use of neutron-based attacks was discussed as early as the 1950s, with the USAtomic Energy Commissionmentioning weapons with a "clean, enhanced neutron output" for use as "antimissile defensive warheads."[62]Studying, improving and defending against such attacks was a major area of research during the 1950s and '60s. A particular example of this is the USPolaris A-3missile, which delivered three warheads travelling on roughly the same trajectory, and thus with a short distance between them. A single ABM could conceivably destroy all three through neutron flux. Developing warheads that were less sensitive to these attacks was also a major area of research in the US and UK during the 1960s.[61]

Some sources claim that the neutron flux attack was also the main design goal of the various nuclear-tipped anti-aircraft weapons like theAIM-26 FalconandCIM-10 Bomarc.OneF-102pilot noted:

GAR-11/AIM-26 was primarily a weapon-killer. The bomber(s, if any) was collateral damage. The weapon was proximity-fused to ensure detonation close enough so an intense flood of neutrons would result in an instantaneous nuclear reaction (NOT full-scale) in the enemy weapon's pit; rendering it incapable of functioning as designed... [O]ur first "neutron bombs" were the GAR-11 and MB-1 Genie.[62]

It has also been suggested that neutron flux's effects on the warhead electronics are another attack vector for ER warheads in the ABM role.Ionizationgreater than 50Grayinsilicon chipsdelivered over seconds to minutes will degrade the function ofsemiconductorsfor long periods.[63]However, while such attacks might be useful against guidance systems, which used relatively advanced electronics, in the ABM role, these components have long ago separated from the warheads by the time they come within range of the interceptors. The electronics in the warheads themselves tend to be very simple, and hardening them was one of the many issues studied in the 1960s.[61]

Lithium-6 hydride(Li6H) is cited as being used as a countermeasure to reduce the vulnerability and "harden" nuclear warheads from the effects of externally generated neutrons.[64][65]Radiation hardeningof the warhead's electronic components as a countermeasure to high altitude neutron warheads somewhat reduces the range that a neutron warhead could successfully cause an unrecoverableglitchby thetransient radiation effects on electronics(TREE) effects.[66][67]

At very high altitudes, at the edge of the atmosphere and above it, another effect comes into play. At lower altitudes, theX-raysgenerated by the bomb are absorbed by the air and havemean free pathson the order of meters. But as the air thins out, the X-rays can travel further, eventually outpacing the area of effect of the neutrons. Inexoatmosphericexplosions, this can be on the order of 10 kilometres (6.2 mi) in radius. In this sort of attack, it is the X-rays promptly delivering energy on the warhead surface that is the active mechanism; the rapid ablation (or "blowoff" ) of the surface creates shock waves that can break up the warhead.[68]

Use as an area denial weapon

edit

In November 2012, British Labour peerLord Gilbertsuggested that multiple enhanced radiation reduced blast (ERRB) warheads could be detonated in the mountain region of the Afghanistan-Pakistan border to prevent infiltration.[69]He proposed to warn the inhabitants to evacuate, then irradiate the area, making it unusable and impassable.[70]Used in this manner, the neutron bomb(s), regardless of burst height, would releaseneutron activatedcasing materials used in the bomb, and depending on burst height, create radioactive soilactivation products.

In much the same fashion as thearea denialeffect resulting from fission product (the substances that make up mostfallout) contamination in an area following a conventionalsurface-burstnuclear explosion, as considered in the Korean War byDouglas MacArthur,it would thus be a form ofradiological warfare—with the difference that neutron bombs produce half, or less, of the quantity of fission products relative to the same-yield purefission bomb.Radiological warfare with neutron bombs that rely onfission primarieswould thus still produce fission fallout, albeit a comparativelycleanerand shorter-lasting version of it in the area than if air bursts were used, as little to no fission products would be deposited on the direct immediate area, instead becoming diluted globalfallout.

The easiest to achieve fusion reaction, ofdeuterium( "D) withtritium(T ") creatinghelium-4,freeing aneutron,and releasing only 3.5MeVin the form of kinetic energy as the chargedAlpha particlethat willinherently generate heat(which manifests as blast and thermal effects), while the majority of the energy of the reaction (14.1 MeV) is carried away by the unchargedfast neutron.[71]Devices with a higher proportion of yield derived from this reaction would be more efficient in the stand-offasteroid impact avoidancerole, due to thepenetrative depth of fast-neutronsand the resulting highermomentum transferthat is produced in this "scabbing" of a much larger mass of material free from the main body, as opposed to the shallower surface penetration andablationofregolith,that is produced by thermal/soft X-rays.

A militarily useful use of a neutron bomb with respect to area denial would be to encase it in a thick shell of material that could be neutron activated, and use a surface burst. In this manner, the neutron bomb would be turned into asalted bomb;for example,zinc-64,produced as a byproduct ofdepleted zinc oxideenrichment, would when neutron activated become zinc-65, which is a gamma emitter with ahalf-lifeof 244 days.[72][improper synthesis?]

Hypothetical effects of a pure fusion bomb

edit
See also:Inertial confinement fusion

With considerable overlap between the two devices, the prompt radiation effects of apure fusion weaponwould similarly be much higher than that of a pure-fission device: approximately twice the initial radiation output of current standard fission–fusion-based weapons. In common with all neutron bombs that must presently derive a small percentage of trigger energy from fission, in any given yield, a 100% pure fusion bomb would likewise generate a smaller atmospheric blast wave than apure-fission bomb. The latter fission device has a higher kinetic energy-ratio per unit of reaction energy released, which is most notable in the comparison with the D-T fusion reaction. A larger percentage of the energy from a D-T fusion reaction is inherently put into uncharged neutron generation as opposed to charged particles, such as theAlpha particleof the D-T reaction, the primary species, that is most responsible for thecoulomb explosion/fireball.[73]

List of US neutron weapons

edit

Anti-ballistic missile warheads

  • W65— Sprint enhanced radiation warhead developed by Livermore (cancelled)[74][75]
  • W66— Sprint enhanced radiation warhead developed by Los Alamos (1975–1976)[74][75]

Ballistic missile warheads

  • W63— Lance enhanced radiation warhead developed by Livermore (cancelled)[74][75]
  • W64— Lance enhanced radiation warhead developed by Los Alamos (cancelled)[74][75]
  • W70Mod 3 — Lance enhanced radiation warhead developed by Livermore (1981–1992).[74][75]

Artillery

  • W79 Mod 0— 8-inch (200 mm) enhanced radiation artillery shell developed by Livermore (1976–1992)[74][75]
  • W82Mod 0 — 155-millimetre (6.1 in) enhanced radiation artillery shell developed by Livermore (cancelled)[74][75]

See also

edit

References

edit
  1. ^abcd"Sci/Tech Neutron bomb: Why 'clean' is deadly".Archivedfrom the original on 2011-10-21.
  2. ^abcde"Chapter 2 Conventional and Nuclear Weapons - Energy Production and Atomic Physics Section I - General. Figure 2-IX, Table 2-III".Archivedfrom the original on 2014-07-19.
  3. ^ab"The Neutron Bomb".Archived fromthe originalon 2018-01-03.Retrieved2014-03-03.
  4. ^abcdef"Neutron bomb an explosive issue, 1981".Archived fromthe originalon 2015-02-28.Retrieved2014-09-04.
  5. ^Muller, Richard A. (2009).Physics for Future Presidents: The Science Behind the Headlines.W.W. Norton & Company. p. 148.ISBN978-0-393-33711-2.
  6. ^abcYost, David Scott (2 February 1988).Soviet Ballistic Missile Defense and the Western Alliance.Harvard University Press.ISBN9780674826106– via Google Books.
  7. ^abPike, John."53T6 Gazelle".globalsecurity.org.Archivedfrom the original on 2015-06-03.
  8. ^"U.S. Nuclear Weapons Stockpile, July 1996".Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists.52(4): 61–63. 1996.Bibcode:1996BuAtS..52d..61..doi:10.1080/00963402.1996.11456646.
  9. ^abKistiakovsky, George (Sep 1978)."The folly of the neutron bomb".Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists.34(7): 27.Bibcode:1978BuAtS..34g..25K.doi:10.1080/00963402.1978.11458533.Retrieved11 February2011.
  10. ^Hafemeister, David W. (2007).Physics of societal issues: calculations on national security, environment, and energy.Springer. p. 18.ISBN978-0-387-95560-5.
  11. ^"Mock up".Remm.nlm.gov.Archivedfrom the original on 2013-06-07.Retrieved2013-11-30.
  12. ^"Range of weapons effects".Johnstonsarchive.net.Archivedfrom the original on 2016-01-08.Retrieved2013-11-30.
  13. ^"Weapon designer Robert Christy discussing scaling laws, that is, how injuries from ionizing radiation do not linearly scale in lock step with the range of thermal flash injuries, especially as higher and higher yield nuclear weapons are used".Webofstories.Retrieved2013-11-30.[permanent dead link‍]
  14. ^Robert D. McFadden(December 1, 2010)."Samuel T. Cohen, Neutron Bomb Inventor, Dies at 89".The New York Times.Archivedfrom the original on January 17, 2012.Retrieved2010-12-02.
  15. ^abcdeCochran, Thomas; Arkin, William; Hoenig, Milton (1987).Nuclear Weapons Databook: U.S. nuclear warhead production. Volume 2.Ballinger Publishing. p. 23.
  16. ^"About: Chemistry articleArchived2011-02-23 at Wikiwix ", by Anne Marie Helmenstine, Ph. D
  17. ^ab"On this Day: 7 April".BBC.1978-04-07.Archivedfrom the original on 2010-12-07.Retrieved2010-07-02.
  18. ^"Nuclear Weapon News and Background".Archived fromthe originalon 2007-09-29.Retrieved2012-10-11.
  19. ^Christopher Ruddy(June 15, 1997)."Bomb inventor says U.S. defenses suffer because of politics".Tribune-Review.Archivedfrom the original on September 22, 2010.Retrieved2010-07-03.
  20. ^"Types of Nuclear Weapons".Archivedfrom the original on 2012-08-09.Retrieved2012-10-12.
  21. ^John Pike."March 13, 1996".Globalsecurity.org.Archivedfrom the original on October 26, 2012.Retrieved2012-10-12.
  22. ^"NNSA Dismantles Last Nuclear Artillery Shell"(PDF).National Nuclear Security Administration. Archived fromthe original(PDF)on 2011-10-23.Retrieved2012-10-12.
  23. ^"Report Of The Select Committee On U.S. National Security And Military/Commercial Concerns With The People's Republic Of China: Chapter 2 – PRC Theft Of U.S. Thermonuclear Warhead Design Information".Archivedfrom the original on 2015-05-08.
  24. ^Cohen, Samuel (9 August 1999)."Check Your Facts: Cox Report Bombs".Insight on the News.[dead link‍]
  25. ^"Neutron bomb: Why 'clean' is deadly".BBC News. 1999-07-15.Archivedfrom the original on 2009-04-07.Retrieved2012-10-12.
  26. ^UK parliamentary question on whether condemnation was considered byThatcher government[1]Archived2009-07-15 at theWayback Machine
  27. ^Ray, Jonathan (January 2015)."Red China's" Capitalist Bomb ": Inside the Chinese Neutron Bomb Program"(PDF).China Strategic Perspectives.8.Archived fromthe original(PDF)on 2015-02-07.Retrieved2015-02-07.
  28. ^Raja Zulfikar (28 May 1998). "Pakistan builds a neutron bomb".nuclnet.
  29. ^Journal, Jonathan Karp Staff Reporter of The Wall Street (17 August 1999)."India Discloses It Is Able To Build a Neutron Bomb".Wall Street Journal.Archivedfrom the original on 2017-01-23.
  30. ^The Nuclear Express: A Political History of the Bomb and Its Proliferation,By Thomas C. Reed, Danny B. Stillman (2010), page 181
  31. ^Wittner, Lawrence S. (2009).Confronting the bomb: a short history of the world nuclear disarmament movement.Stanford University Press. pp.132–133.ISBN978-0-8047-5632-7.
  32. ^Auten, Brian J. (2008).Carter's conversion: the hardening of American defense policy.University of Missouri Press. p.134.ISBN978-0-8262-1816-2.
  33. ^Snow, Donald (2008).National security for a new era: globalization and geopolitics after Iraq.Pearson Longman. p. 115.ISBN978-0-205-62225-2.
  34. ^Herken, Greff (2003).Brotherhood of the Bomb: The Tangled Lives and Loyalties of Robert Oppenheimer, Ernest Lawrence, and Edward Teller.Macmillan. p. 332.ISBN978-0-8050-6589-3.
  35. ^ISN Editors."Poland reveals Warsaw Pact war plans".International Relations And Security Network.Archived fromthe originalon 8 October 2013.Retrieved23 December2014.{{cite web}}:|author=has generic name (help)
  36. ^Healy, Melissa (October 3, 1987)."Senate Permits Study for New Tactical Nuclear Missile".Los Angeles Times.Archivedfrom the original on December 23, 2012.Retrieved2012-08-08.
  37. ^"Check Your Facts: Cox Report Bombs".Insight on the News.9 August 1999.Archivedfrom the original on 4 March 2016.Retrieved5 June2015.
  38. ^"List of All U.S. Nuclear Weapons".2006-10-14.Archivedfrom the original on 2013-02-08.Retrieved2012-10-12.
  39. ^ab"What Is a Neutron Bomb? By Anne Marie Helmenstine, Ph.D".Archived fromthe originalon 2011-01-05.Retrieved2007-04-20.
  40. ^Boersma, Hans."1 (NL) Corps Artillery • 1 Legerkorpsartillerie (1 Lka)".orbat85.nl.Archived fromthe originalon 2015-09-24.Retrieved2015-08-30.
  41. ^"Accomplishments in the 1970s: LLNL's 50th Anniversary".17 February 2005. Archived fromthe originalon 17 February 2005.
  42. ^"what is a neutron bomb" In strategic terms, the neutron bomb has a theoretical deterrent effect: discouraging an armoured ground assault by arousing the fear of neutron bomb counterattack "".Archived fromthe originalon 2006-01-13.Retrieved2005-12-21.
  43. ^"Candid Interviews with Former Soviet Officials Reveal U.S. Strategic Intelligence Failure Over Decades".gwu.edu.Archivedfrom the original on 2011-08-05.
  44. ^abcd"Fact-index, neutron bomb".Archived fromthe originalon 2013-06-30.Retrieved2014-08-09.
  45. ^Calculated from"Effects of Nuclear Explosions".Archivedfrom the original on 2014-04-28.Retrieved2014-04-21.assuming 0.5kt combined blast and thermal
  46. ^"1) Effects of blast pressure on the human body"(PDF).Archived(PDF)from the original on 2013-01-27.Retrieved2012-10-12.
  47. ^"Field manual 3-4 chapter 4".Archivedfrom the original on 2013-03-13.
  48. ^ab"Applications of the Monte Carlo Adjoint Shielding Methodology - MIT".Archivedfrom the original on 2015-07-17.
  49. ^Information, Reed Business (1986-03-13).New Scientist March 13, 1986 pg 45.Retrieved2012-10-12.{{cite book}}:|first1=has generic name (help)[permanent dead link‍]
  50. ^Information, Reed Business (1986-06-12).New Scientist June 12, 1986 pg 62.{{cite book}}:|first1=has generic name (help)[permanent dead link‍]
  51. ^"Monte Carlo Calculations Using MCNP4B for an Optimal Shielding Design of a 14-MeV Neutron Source, Submitted to the Journal of Radiation Protection Dosimetry 1998"(PDF).Archived(PDF)from the original on 2016-03-05.
  52. ^"Neutron Interactions – Part 2 George Starkschall, Ph.D. Department of Radiation Physics"(PDF).Archived fromthe original(PDF)on 2015-07-17.Retrieved2014-03-02.
  53. ^"22.55" Principles of Radiation Interactions ""(PDF).Archived(PDF)from the original on 2015-07-17.
  54. ^"What is a neutron bomb".Archived fromthe originalon 2006-01-13.Retrieved2005-12-21.
  55. ^Strobing, Ronan (Jul 2009).Terror Reigns Again By Ronan Strobing. pg 418.ShieldCrest.ISBN9780955855771.
  56. ^"M1A1/2 Abrams Main Battle Tank, United States of America".Archivedfrom the original on 2014-08-10.
  57. ^"For example, M-1 tank armor includes depleted uranium, which can undergo fast fission and can be made to be radioactive when bombarded with neutrons".Archived fromthe originalon 2011-01-05.Retrieved2007-04-20.
  58. ^"Archived copy"(PDF).Archived fromthe original(PDF)on 2011-10-19.Retrieved2011-11-29.{{cite web}}:CS1 maint: archived copy as title (link)Paper Summary Submitted to Spectrum 2000, Sept 24-28, 2000, Chattanooga, TN. Ducrete: A Cost Effective Radiation Shielding Material. Quote- "The Ducrete/DUAGG replaces the conventional aggregate in concrete producing concrete with a density of 5.6 to 6.4 g/cm3 (compared to 2.3 g/cm3 for conventional concrete). This shielding material has the unique feature of having both high Z and low Z elements in a single matrix. Consequently, it is very effective for the attenuation of gamma and neutron radiation..."
  59. ^M. J. Haire and S. Y. Lobach,"Cask size and weight reduction through the use of depleted uranium dioxide (DUO2)-concrete material "Archived2012-09-26 at theWayback Machine,Waste Management 2006 Conference, Tucson, Arizona, February 26–March 2, 2006.
  60. ^"Half-Value Layer (Shielding)".Archived fromthe originalon 2014-08-11.Retrieved2014-08-09.
  61. ^abcWalker, John (2016).British Nuclear Weapons and the Test Ban 1954–1973.Routledge. pp. 23, 323–325.ISBN978-1-317-17170-6.
  62. ^abMaloney, Sean (Fall 2014)."Secrets of the BOMARC: Re-examining Canada's Misunderstood Missile".Archived fromthe originalon 2018-08-10.Retrieved2018-10-05.{{cite magazine}}:Cite magazine requires|magazine=(help)
  63. ^"FAS Nuclear Weapon Radiation Effects".Archivedfrom the original on 2013-07-21.
  64. ^"Section 12.0 Useful Tables Nuclear Weapons Frequently Asked Questions".Archivedfrom the original on 2011-02-24.Due to moderating ability and light weight, used to harden weapons against outside neutron fluxes (especially in combination with Li-6)...The very high cross section of this reaction for thermalized neutrons, combined with the light weight of the Li-6 atom, make it useful in the form of lithium hydride for hardening of nuclear weapons against external neutron fluxes.
  65. ^"Restricted Data Declassification Policy, 1946 to the Present RDD-1".Archivedfrom the original on 2013-10-20.The fact that Li6H is used in unspecified weapons for hardening
  66. ^"The Nuclear Matters Handbook, F.13".Archived fromthe originalon 2013-03-02.
  67. ^"Transient Radiation Effects on Electronics (TREE) Handbook Formerly Design Handbook for TREE, Chapters 1-6".Archived fromthe originalon 2014-05-06.Retrieved2014-05-06.
  68. ^"Nuclear Matters Handbook".Archived fromthe originalon 2014-05-06.Nuclear weapon-generated X-rays are the chief threat to the survival of strategic missiles in-flight above the atmosphere and to satellites... The Neutron and gamma ray effects dominate at lower altitudes where the air absorbs most of the X-rays.
  69. ^"Huffington Post".26 November 2012.Archivedfrom the original on 2012-11-29.Retrieved2012-11-27.
  70. ^"Lord Gilbert obituary, by Andrew Roth, 3 June 2013." Nobody lives up in the mountains on the border between Afghanistan and Pakistan except for a few goats and a handful of people herding them, "he observed." If you told them that some... warheads were going to be dropped there and that it would be a very unpleasant place to go, they would not go there. "".TheGuardian.3 June 2013.Archivedfrom the original on 6 March 2014.
  71. ^ Shultis, J.K. & Faw, R.E. (2002).Fundamentals of nuclear science and engineering.CRC Press.p. 151.ISBN978-0-8247-0834-4.
  72. ^"1.6 Cobalt Bombs and other Salted Bombs, Nuclear Weapons Archive, Carey Sublette".Archivedfrom the original on 2012-08-09.
  73. ^Hafemeister, David (2007).Physics of Societal Issues - Springer.doi:10.1007/978-0-387-68909-8.ISBN978-0-387-95560-5.
  74. ^abcdefgJosserand, Terry Michael (2017-03-01).R&A for UUR_Weapon_History_Phases_20170206(Report). Sandia National Lab. (SNL-NM), Albuquerque, NM (United States).OSTI1429158.Retrieved2021-07-24.
  75. ^abcdefgCarey Sublette."List of All U.S. Nuclear Weapons".Nuclear Weapon Archive.Retrieved2022-06-24.

Further reading

edit
edit
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Neutron_bomb&oldid=1259487284"