4 ms·

They used to be bigger though. I think around 20 megatons.

dumbfoundded 5y ago
Tsar Bomba, probably the largest nuke ever used was ~50MT (1). (1) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tsar_Bomba https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tsar_Bomba
- Victerius 5y ago
  And the Davy Crockett, the smallest nuke ever, could go as low as 10 tons :3
tehjoker 5y ago
Yea, the US arsenal downsized the weapons in keeping with the tonnage restrictions in the various arms reduction agreements. However, they compensated by increasing the accuracy of the weapons so that fewer bombs per target will be needed, increasing the hard kill power of the arsenal without violating the agreements. This is important because "in theory" no one is allowed to explicitly target civilians, which don't require much accuracy, per the laws of war. Military targets are often in reinforced concrete or buried and so require a precise high pressure hit to crack. In practice, aiming points are chosen of military targets that are quite close to civilians.
- masklinn 5y ago
  Also because a single large blast wastes a lot of energy, and is easier to intercept. You’ll do way more damage way more reliably with 20 1MT warheads than with a single 20MT bomb. But it required reliable ballistic missiles and M(I)RV. If your delivery mechanism is bombers, then at equiv-tech you have to account for high attrition rates, and thus need large payloads to ensure even low success rates will do the necessary damage to the target.
helsinkiandrew 5y ago
Interesting that the largest nuclear test on Bikini Atoll (just 4000km away from Tonga) was 15 megatons. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_weapon_yield https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_weapon_yield
- arethuza 5y ago
  It wasn't supposed to be 15 megatons, the expected yield was 6 megatons: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Castle_Bravo https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Castle_Bravo The larger than expected yield caused a lot of problems.
  - jdougan 5y ago
    I'd argue that the very very wrong models for fallout generation and dispersal were an even bigger issue. If they hadn't gotten that wrong, no one would have cared other than the scientists in the near bunkers who had to change their trousers.

Tsar Bomba, probably the largest nuke ever used was ~50MT (1). (1) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tsar_Bomba https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tsar_Bomba

Victerius 5y ago
And the Davy Crockett, the smallest nuke ever, could go as low as 10 tons :3

tehjoker 5y ago

Yea, the US arsenal downsized the weapons in keeping with the tonnage restrictions in the various arms reduction agreements. However, they compensated by increasing the accuracy of the weapons so that fewer bombs per target will be needed, increasing the hard kill power of the arsenal without violating the agreements. This is important because "in theory" no one is allowed to explicitly target civilians, which don't require much accuracy, per the laws of war. Military targets are often in reinforced concrete or buried and so require a precise high pressure hit to crack. In practice, aiming points are chosen of military targets that are quite close to civilians.

masklinn 5y ago
Also because a single large blast wastes a lot of energy, and is easier to intercept. You’ll do way more damage way more reliably with 20 1MT warheads than with a single 20MT bomb. But it required reliable ballistic missiles and M(I)RV. If your delivery mechanism is bombers, then at equiv-tech you have to account for high attrition rates, and thus need large payloads to ensure even low success rates will do the necessary damage to the target.

helsinkiandrew 5y ago

Interesting that the largest nuclear test on Bikini Atoll (just 4000km away from Tonga) was 15 megatons. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_weapon_yield https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_weapon_yield

arethuza 5y ago
It wasn't supposed to be 15 megatons, the expected yield was 6 megatons: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Castle_Bravo https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Castle_Bravo The larger than expected yield caused a lot of problems.
- jdougan 5y ago
  I'd argue that the very very wrong models for fallout generation and dispersal were an even bigger issue. If they hadn't gotten that wrong, no one would have cared other than the scientists in the near bunkers who had to change their trousers.