4 ms·
It seems to be about right--the predicted damage to Hiroshima from Little Boy matches up pretty well with observed damage (see http://www.atomicarchive.com/Maps
by Pinckney 16y ago
It seems to be about right--the predicted damage to Hiroshima from Little Boy matches up pretty well with observed damage (see http://www.atomicarchive.com/Maps/HiroshimaMap.shtml http://www.atomicarchive.com/Maps/HiroshimaMap.shtml)
I think it's just a very different geographic scale of the cities involved. We learn that Hiroshima was destroyed by a single bomb; we don't often hear that Hiroshima is tiny in comparison to e.g. LA (which would require something on the scale of Tsar Bomba, or multiple strikes, to destroy it to a similar degree).
- Someone 16y agoAlso, as the bombing of Tokyo showed, one didn't need an atomic bomb to flatten a Japanese city of the time. Japanese housing was very flimsy (probably because of the earthquake risk; you either build something tat withstands a quake, or something that will not hurt you when it falls down on you). Bamboo and rice paper provide very limited coverage from any blast, burn very well, and leave almost nothing.
- dstorrs 16y agoAlso, Hiroshima was built mostly out of wood and paper -- supposedly, the fires killed a huge number of people who weren't killed directly by the bomb.