6 ms·

The US no longer tests Nukes right? So how do they know the new stuff works I wonder . . .

by hartror 16y ago

ceejayoz 16y ago
My understanding is that they simulate them via supercomputing. I imagine this fact has caused a few Pentagon generals to go bald prematurely.
- jfb 16y ago
  A friend of mine from college works at Livermore labs doing exactly this (simulating, not going bald.) He can't really talk about work, but it certainly seems like a pretty good gig for a physicist.
- InclinedPlane 16y ago
  As far as I can tell the US hasn't had a nuclear test that went far different from expectations since the 60s. And modern nuclear warheads haven't used dramatically different designs for quite some time. Given that it's a pretty good bet that all US nuclear weapons in service are reliable.
GHFigs 16y ago
4 of the top 20 super computers in the world, and another 2 in the top 100[1], are operated by the US National Nuclear Security Administration. What do they do? "One of the primary missions of NNSA is to maintain and enhance the safety, security and reliability of the U.S. nuclear weapons stockpile. NNSA, through its Office of Defense Programs, ensures that the U.S. nuclear arsenal meets the country’s national security requirements and continues to serve its essential deterrence role." [1]: http://www.top500.org/list/2010/11/100 http://www.top500.org/list/2010/11/100 [2]: http://nnsa.energy.gov/aboutus/ourprograms http://nnsa.energy.gov/aboutus/ourprograms
gamble 16y ago
Inspections, subcritical testing, and computer simulation. The Russian solution is much simpler: when their bombs reach their shelf life, they're recycled into new weapons. Like the Soyuz versus the Space Shuttle, it's a lot easier to just rebuild a complex system then to predict how it will age. Of course, it does have the tiny drawback of generating enormous amounts of highly toxic waste, but in Mother Russia you can simply dump the waste in a lake.
- kijuhygtyujikol 16y ago
  Recycling a nuke doesn't create much waste. The main components of a nuke are the fissionable material = reused as is (plutonium has a rather long shelf-life), the chemical explosive = reused ( a lot of the explosive used in gulf-war-1 was WW11 surplus stuff, baritol and compB explosives can be remelted and recast continually), and possibly a neutron trigger which does decay - but into a less radioactive isotope. The only waste is irradiated casings, but since Pu isn't really that radioactive it's a lot less of a problem than a used cancer therapy machine.

The US no longer tests Nukes right? So how do they know the new stuff works I wonder . . .

by hartror 16y ago

The US no longer tests Nukes right? So how do they know the new stuff works I wonder . . .

My understanding is that they simulate them via supercomputing. I imagine this fact has caused a few Pentagon generals to go bald prematurely.

jfb 16y ago
A friend of mine from college works at Livermore labs doing exactly this (simulating, not going bald.) He can't really talk about work, but it certainly seems like a pretty good gig for a physicist.
InclinedPlane 16y ago
As far as I can tell the US hasn't had a nuclear test that went far different from expectations since the 60s. And modern nuclear warheads haven't used dramatically different designs for quite some time. Given that it's a pretty good bet that all US nuclear weapons in service are reliable.

GHFigs 16y ago

4 of the top 20 super computers in the world, and another 2 in the top 100[1], are operated by the US National Nuclear Security Administration. What do they do? "One of the primary missions of NNSA is to maintain and enhance the safety, security and reliability of the U.S. nuclear weapons stockpile. NNSA, through its Office of Defense Programs, ensures that the U.S. nuclear arsenal meets the country’s national security requirements and continues to serve its essential deterrence role." [1]: http://www.top500.org/list/2010/11/100 http://www.top500.org/list/2010/11/100 [2]: http://nnsa.energy.gov/aboutus/ourprograms http://nnsa.energy.gov/aboutus/ourprograms

gamble 16y ago

Inspections, subcritical testing, and computer simulation. The Russian solution is much simpler: when their bombs reach their shelf life, they're recycled into new weapons. Like the Soyuz versus the Space Shuttle, it's a lot easier to just rebuild a complex system then to predict how it will age. Of course, it does have the tiny drawback of generating enormous amounts of highly toxic waste, but in Mother Russia you can simply dump the waste in a lake.

kijuhygtyujikol 16y ago
Recycling a nuke doesn't create much waste. The main components of a nuke are the fissionable material = reused as is (plutonium has a rather long shelf-life), the chemical explosive = reused ( a lot of the explosive used in gulf-war-1 was WW11 surplus stuff, baritol and compB explosives can be remelted and recast continually), and possibly a neutron trigger which does decay - but into a less radioactive isotope. The only waste is irradiated casings, but since Pu isn't really that radioactive it's a lot less of a problem than a used cancer therapy machine.