![]() ![]() The technology must clearly be consequential from a military/security standpoint. By the 1990s, with the Cold War confrontation over, both the missile warheads and artillery shells were withdrawn.Will the neutrino fields find a military use by 2050? In order to count the technology must directly use neutrinos (what I mean is described more carefully below). The warheads were never deployed in Europe, and U.S. However, other military strategists warned that fielding a “clean” nuclear weapon might only lower the threshold for entering into a full-scale nuclear exchange, and some civilian groups objected to the very notion of applying the label “clean” to a weapon that killed by irradiation while sparing property. To this end, enhanced radiation warheads were built for the short-range Lance missile and for a 200-mm (8-inch) artillery shell. At least in theory, a defending NATO country might sanction the use of the bomb to annihilate Warsaw Pact tank crews without destroying its own cities or irradiating its own population. ![]() Also during the 1970s, the neutron bomb was considered by some American military planners to have a convenient deterrent effect: discouraging an armoured ground invasion of western Europe by arousing the fear of neutron bomb counterattack. ![]() For a brief period in the 1970s, an enhanced radiation warhead was fitted onto the Sprint antiballistic missile ( see Nike missile) with the expectation that a pulse of high-energy neutrons released by the exploding warhead would inactivate or prematurely detonate an incoming nuclear warhead. The neutron bomb was conceived in the United States in the 1950s and first tested in the 1960s. It could be launched on a short-range missile, fired by an artillery piece, or possibly delivered by a small aircraft. Because of its short-range destructiveness and the absence of long-range effects, the neutron bomb might be highly effective against tank and infantry formations on the battlefield but might not endanger nearby cities or other population centres. High-energy neutrons, though short-lived, could penetrate armour or several metres of earth and would be extremely destructive to living tissue. Its blast and heat effects would be confined to an area of only a few hundred metres in radius, but within a somewhat larger radius of 1,000–2,000 metres the fusion reaction would throw off a powerful wave of neutron and gamma radiation. The bomb might have a yield, or explosive strength, of only one kiloton, a fraction of the 15-kiloton explosion that devastated Hiroshima, Japan, in 1945. A neutron bomb is actually a small thermonuclear bomb in which a few kilograms of plutonium or uranium, ignited by a conventional explosive, would serve as a fission “trigger” to ignite a fusion explosion in a capsule containing several grams of deuterium- tritium. Neutron bomb, also called enhanced radiation warhead, specialized type of nuclear weapon that would produce minimal blast and heat but would release large amounts of lethal radiation. SpaceNext50 Britannica presents SpaceNext50, From the race to the Moon to space stewardship, we explore a wide range of subjects that feed our curiosity about space!.Learn about the major environmental problems facing our planet and what can be done about them! Saving Earth Britannica Presents Earth’s To-Do List for the 21st Century.100 Women Britannica celebrates the centennial of the Nineteenth Amendment, highlighting suffragists and history-making politicians.COVID-19 Portal While this global health crisis continues to evolve, it can be useful to look to past pandemics to better understand how to respond today.Student Portal Britannica is the ultimate student resource for key school subjects like history, government, literature, and more. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |