9 ms·
Much of the testing is due to refining designs to make them more efficient, smaller, and lighter. If the Ukraine decided to build a bomb that wasn't state of t
by lumost 5y ago
Much of the testing is due to refining designs to make them more efficient, smaller, and lighter. If the Ukraine decided to build a bomb that wasn't state of the art they could be reasonably assured that it would work, but substantially less clear on final yield.
Yield only really matters in theory and for planning MAD. Tank divisions are equally destroyed with a 100 kiloton device as a 10 megaton device.
- iab 5y agoBut as a deterrent, you would need this to be reasonably accurate, yes?
- p_l 5y agoWhy? All you really care is whether the boom is big enough, and that you can deliver it on target. The latter was a big reason for optimising bomb construction, but you can just as well optimise your launchers - which leads to missiles like R-36, where the main difference between it and a space launcher is replacing the payload. Yes, early USA ICBMs also serve as base for space launches, but unlike R-36 were much less storable (except for Titan, iirc) and less powerful.
- neartheplain 5y agoIf we're talking about devices with megaton or hundred-kiloton yields, accuracy isn't super important. And simpler, unminiaturized weapons are probably going to be bomber-dropped anyway.