Nuclear vs. Thermonuclear

Darth Yoshi · Post by **Darth Yoshi** » 2002-09-04 01:04am

What's the difference between nuclear and thermonuclear effects?

Master of Ossus · Post by **Master of Ossus** » 2002-09-04 01:10am

Thermonuclear explosives use the detonation of the nuclear weapon to create a secondary effect on gas (hydrogen). This creates a plasma, and helps to increase the blast effects of the weapon.

Nuclear devices do not use this, and are purely fission devices. Thermonuclear weapons are both much more complex, and much more powerful.

Post by **Sea Skimmer** » 2002-09-04 01:53am

At the core, Ossus has given you more detail, its this

Nuclear= Fission using a chemical explosive trigger
Thermonuclear= Fusion using a Fission trigger

Thermonuclear devices are preferable because they are massively more powerful for the weight. Megaton or even hundreds of kiloton fission weapons would be insanely large, you'd need a good-sized freighter to move one around. On the other hand, Fusion weapons of similar power can be hauled around by jet fighters even in the 1950s, with today's advanced warhead designs your average advanced trainer could deliver a 1-megaton bomb, though the blast might bring it down.

Really past the 1950s the only use for basic Fission weapons was ASW, and some battlefield tactical weapons. In these roles the small yield was valuable.

Cpt_Frank · Post by **Cpt_Frank** » 2002-09-04 08:47am

Hmmm Thermonuclear weapons.... *drooooooool*

Btw would it be feasible to use these weapons in space combat?

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2002-09-04 12:40pm

Cpt_Frank wrote:Hmmm Thermonuclear weapons.... *drooooooool*

Btw would it be feasible to use these weapons in space combat?

Of course. Babylon5 did a good job of showing the effect that a megaton-class nuke should have on a starship, with that "In the Beginning" destruction of a Minbari Sharlin with a pair of 2 megaton nukes (sadly, B5 fans responded to this realistic treatment by screaming bloody murder and demanding that it be made just as unrealistic as SW and ST).

Probable differences between thermonuclear blast in space as opposed to atmosphere:

No large fireball
No shockwave
Radiation strongly weighted toward invisible frequencies (X-ray, gamma-ray), again due to lack of atmosphere to absorb and re-radiate it at lower frequencies
EMP probably somewhat weaker due to lack of atmospheric interaction

When the radiation strikes a starship, you should expect to see a bright flash followed by the ship's "skin" boiling off at the surface layers. This will tend to produce a propulsive effect, literally pushing the ship to one side through impromptu rocketry (this is the theory behind the stand-off nuclear detonation technique proposed for asteroid deflection). All thin surface components such as antennae would be melted or vapourized, and you would expect to see heavy damage inside the ship through any transparent windows, open portals, docking bay doors, etc.

Cpt_Frank · Post by **Cpt_Frank** » 2002-09-04 12:43pm

Cool. I guess we should throw that into the 'concepts for realistic sci-fi' thread.

Darth Yoshi · Post by **Darth Yoshi** » 2002-09-05 12:39am

Thanks for the info. The question was just bugging me.

Master of Ossus · Post by **Master of Ossus** » 2002-09-05 01:35am

Darth Yoshi wrote:Thanks for the info. The question was just bugging me.

I think I speak for everyone when I say NP.

Incidentally, Mike, I just laugh at some of the B5er explanations for why the Black Star died so easily. One of them even claimed that the ship's destruction had nothing to do with the weapons, and was the result of the asteroid belt, and another claimed it was a malfunctioning jump engine!

Post by **weemadando** » 2002-09-05 12:36pm

Master of Ossus wrote:
Darth Yoshi wrote:Thanks for the info. The question was just bugging me.
I think I speak for everyone when I say NP.

Incidentally, Mike, I just laugh at some of the B5er explanations for why the Black Star died so easily. One of them even claimed that the ship's destruction had nothing to do with the weapons, and was the result of the asteroid belt, and another claimed it was a malfunctioning jump engine! :shock:

I remember that during my fanatical B5er period I did some calcs based on scaling, nuclear weapon yield calcs and the wonderful asteroid calcs of Mr. Wong that resulted in a likely rating of closer to 2 gigatons rather than 2 megatons.

They were firmly debunked by Brian Young however.

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2002-09-05 12:46pm

weemadando wrote:I remember that during my fanatical B5er period I did some calcs based on scaling, nuclear weapon yield calcs and the wonderful asteroid calcs of Mr. Wong that resulted in a likely rating of closer to 2 gigatons rather than 2 megatons.

They were firmly debunked by Brian Young however.

I still remember Adam Warlock once came on Brian Young's guestbook ranting that you would need many teratons to destroy the Sharlin at that range (and he actually put "P.Eng" after his name at the time, although he hasn't tried that bullshit since then). I also like the recurrent B5er claim that the Sharlin's movement was proof of teraton energy, by calculating momentum transfer from light, and ignoring the rocketry effect of surface vapourization. Perhaps I shouldn't be so harsh; they probably didn't ignore it since they probably didn't have a clue that such a thing was possible.

Post by **Steve** » 2002-09-05 11:13pm

Fivers.... oh sweet Jesus, FIVERS! AGH!

So many bad memories.....

Spyder · Post by **Spyder** » 2002-09-06 12:09am

Cool program, bizzare fanbase.

Master of Ossus · Post by **Master of Ossus** » 2002-09-06 12:52am

Spyder wrote:Cool program, bizzare fanbase.

Seriously.

adam warlock · Post by **adam warlock** » 2002-09-06 08:09pm

I still remember Adam Warlock once came on Brian Young's guestbook ranting that you would need many teratons to destroy the Sharlin at that range (and he actually put "P.Eng" after his name at the time, although he hasn't tried that bullshit since then).

??????

actually i dont remember that at all?..
because i never posted anything on brian youngs page..
i made it clear in spacebattles that i never had anything against his website.

and i thought big steve knew well that i have an MSc.. not a P.Eng.

you guys are a pathetic.. :p

SpacedTeddyBear · Post by **SpacedTeddyBear** » 2002-09-07 12:25am

As Deanna Troi would say, " I sense some hostility here toward Fivers." Well not hostility, more like slight annoyance.

Master of Ossus · Post by **Master of Ossus** » 2002-09-07 12:28am

SpacedTeddyBear wrote:As Deanna Troi would say, " I sense some hostility here toward Fivers." Well not hostility, more like slight annoyance.

There is a difference between a Fiver and a RABID Fiver. Most Fivers are actually good people. I can easily be considered one myself. However, some Fivers take those extra few steps and become rabid fivers. Those people do not respond to reason and come up with really stupid ideas about how the universe works. I posted some examples of what I've heard from them earlier in the thread. Those are the people that we are annoyed with. Not regular fivers.

Incidentally, do you get your name from the Ba-BEAR-Lon 5 toy that Sheridan chucked out the airlock? Cool.