3 ms·
Nukes are expensive. Small size/weight is what you get for that money. For example, if you want a 1kt bunker buster using conventional explosives that's gonna
by dsfyu404ed 7y ago
Nukes are expensive. Small size/weight is what you get for that money.
For example, if you want a 1kt bunker buster using conventional explosives that's gonna be a heck of a bomb and therefore greatly limited in where/when/how it can be used. A 1kt nuke could fit in a JDAM sized form factor and be dropped by pretty much any military aircraft. Similarly, if you want to decimate a city with conventional bombs you'll need to deliver a heck of a lot of bombs. With nukes you only need one.
- catalogia 7y agoI'm not sure why you've been downvoted, what you say seems true. Smaller nukes are not necessarily efficient nukes. The smallest nukes, using a "linear implosion" design, are very inefficient. A W48 warhead with a tiny 0.072 kt yield has more Plutonium than the 21 kt "fat man" bomb dropped on Nagasaki. (~13kg for the former, <7kg for the later) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/W48 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/W48