Poll of the Day > What's the smallest possible man-made nuke?

(+) Yeah! (+)

Like, can we get to the point where we can start our BBQs with a cute little nuke button?

---

Ford was working on nuclear-powered vehicles in the fifties, but scrapped the idea due to safety concerns.

---

The primary limitation is critical mass. While there are things that can alter the critical mass such as neutron reflectors and moderators, there's still effectively a certain minimum size for each element.

The smallest nuclear weapon system built was Mk-54, used by the M-28 Davy Crockett, a nuclear recoilless gun. It could fire a 51 pound (23 kg) warhead 1.25 miles (2 km). The warhead had an explosive yield of 10 tons of TNT and measured 10.75 inches (273mm) in diameter and 15.7 inches (400mm) long.



The Mk-54 was also used in the Special Atomic Demolition Munition, or SADM, which was the size of a large backpack.



---

pic is from world war II

---

captpackrat posted...

The smallest nuclear weapon system built was Mk-54, used by the M-28 Davy Crockett, a nuclear recoilless rifle. It could fire a 51 pound (23 kg) warhead 1.25 miles (2 km). The warhead had an explosive yield of 10 tons of TNT and measured 10.75 inches (273mm) in diameter and 15.7 inches (400mm) long.

That sounds...too close to the nuclear blast to be safe for the forces deploying the weapon. Maybe I'm wrong , but I can't see a real strategic value to radiating something close enough to where your own force may end up being pushed into the fallout zone.

---

WhiskeyDisk posted...

That sounds...too close to the nuclear blast to be safe for the forces deploying the weapon. Maybe I'm wrong , but I can't see a real strategic value to radiating something close enough to where your own force may end up being pushed into the fallout zone.

It's fine. Just fire it from the back of a jeep, driving really fast away from the target area.

---

WhiskeyDisk posted...

That sounds...too close to the nuclear blast to be safe for the forces deploying the weapon. Maybe I'm wrong , but I can't see a real strategic value to radiating something close enough to where your own force may end up being pushed into the fallout zone.

The weapon yield was only 10-20 tons so that's not a terribly big explosion for a nuke, similar to a large conventional bomb like the Cloudmaker, Daisy Cutter, or MOAB. The main danger from it was radiation, which was instantly lethal (10,000 rem) to about 500 feet and "probably lethal" (600 rem) out to 1/4 mile. Radiation would fall off rapidly from there, and fallout probably wouldn't be too bad either. Just pray you don't have a misfire, and keep the wind at your back.

---

WhiskeyDisk posted...

That sounds...too close to the nuclear blast to be safe for the forces deploying the weapon. Maybe I'm wrong , but I can't see a real strategic value to radiating something close enough to where your own force may end up being pushed into the fallout zone.

Which would be why it hasn't exactly made it into mainstream use.