2009/9/10 George Herbert <george.herb...@gmail.com>: > On Wed, Sep 9, 2009 at 3:32 PM, geni <geni...@gmail.com> wrote: >> 2009/9/9 <wjhon...@aol.com>: >>> It's a bit of a mistaken idea that the issue with H bombs is their >>> "plans". >>> The method of making an H bomb is widely known. >>> The problem is not the blueprints. It's creating the necessary >>> equipment in order to enrich the uranium in the first place. Not a >>> cheap thing to do. Everyone however knows *how* to do it. >> >> No thats the A-bomb (and even then explosive lenses are >> problematical). H-Bomb plane still contain significant elements of >> speculation. The various failed attempts to construct them suggest >> it's not that easy. > > This is wishful thinking, Geni. > > Making really small H-bombs (100 kg) is slightly tricky - but medium > sized ones (1 ton) is not. > > And the explosive lenses get easier the more you know about how to > make them. The 1945 vintage ones we show for [[Fat Man]] are far > harder to design and make than the ones used just 10 years later for a > Brok / [[Mark 12 nuclear bomb]].
You have completely missed Geni's point. Fat Man was an A-bomb, not an H-bomb. Please read http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_weapon_design _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
