In a message dated 10/8/2000 8:40:28 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
<< How's this for full sentences:
I was trying to figure out the blast and radiation effects of a
hypothetical 10-20t yield 2kg (total mass, not pit mass) Californium
baby nuke just the other day, and I found out that the published
official software models poop out at 0.1 kiloton. What a pity. I wonder
if I should file a FOIA request on the Davy Crockett effects
information--they must have test shot info on at least one of those
puppies, since they were actually fielded for a while. That ought to get
me on *somebody's* list, if I'm not already. :) I nosed around a bunch
on the 'net, too.
*Why* was I doing this? I was trying to figure out just how dead some
characters in the movie version of _Starship Troopers_ ought to be. We
hard-SF readers are a funny bunch.
Btw, for any who didn't know, SSBN is also the designation for the US
Navy's fleet ballistic missile submarines.
Go Echelon! Beat Constitution!
My guess is you left out the phrase anthrax--a teriffic rock group. Also
bio-engineered Botulinus Clostridium. I was remembering that there is the
explosive effects of Californium, but I can't remember whether its
Californium-54, 94, or 254?
Dr. Freeh has a bad haircut! Can we use Californium to make better fission
Is Californium a safer fuel to use? Is it potent enuf -perhaps thermionic
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Mon May 28 2001 - 09:50:15 MDT