3 ms·
Doesn't have to be an exact copy so, but yes design might be tricky. I assume solvable so, at least in a primitive and workable way. Machining, to be honest, be
by hef19898 3y ago
Doesn't have to be an exact copy so, but yes design might be tricky. I assume solvable so, at least in a primitive and workable way. Machining, to be honest, beside size of the parts themselves, is something you can do in some reasonably well equipped maker space. And for size, CNC machines are readily available on the used market. And those are light years ahead of anything the Manhatten project had. Or Apollo for that matter (excluding the Saturn V of course, but that is rocket science).
- trashtester 3y agoFrom my undertanding, Fat Man requires a very precise design to focus the shock wave properly, or the bomb will never detonate properly. This design is quite non-trivial even today. It took several of the brightest minds of all time to get it just right back then (like von Neumann). Even with modern tools, you still need a team of quite capable engineers/scientists to pull something like that off, even if you do have the plutonium. The little boy design is easier to engineer, but bomb grade uranium is even harder to produce than plutonium.
- hef19898 3y agoTotally agree, the science / design part of it is still not trivial. Also I know next to nothing about it. The machining bit so, uaing proper machinery, is easy. And the necessary engineers and technicians readily available.
- trashtester 3y agoNot even a 1000 normal engineers can replace a single von Neumann. What makes it easier, though, is that the general principle is relatively well known, so one could always brute force the solution using computer simulations, even if unable to do the math by hand.