I flew RB-57 aircraft against Cabriolet and Buggy. We flew through the "dust cloud" after the larger rocks had fallen out. We collected particular and gaseous matter for the scientists to analyze after the tests.
Plowshare wasn't bad considered you could move a hill in a single blast. Other than that, I can't think of any other means for using atomic explosives.
@anthonyc31 He's not the one claiming that a 150kt explosion at 50 meters depth would cause a localized precision cave-in. Hell screw it ground zero is not in the middle of a desert, why don't you go test your little theory with a dosimeter?
It is a shame that our species is not unanimously accountable enough to safely utilize the relatively inexpensive, yet enormous earth shaping potential of nuclear power.
Robert w regarding the enormous optimism during the plowshare programs for moving earth. Context? Keep in mind there is no safe arrangement of accountability for this tool.
Robert w oh. So I was advocating the use of this tool? This is news to me. I found it refreshing that this video was entirely in the context of using the supercritical reaction as a tool. As foolish as that may be. Nobody talks about that way. Obviously, it is something that can never be used. I wonder how long it will be until new technology is discovered that must remain unanimously off limits. By the way, you come off as imperceptive.
+Robert w seriously though, Fukushima is just a bad comparison to these tests. Both are really different things. Something more related to this might be Lake Chagan of Kazakhstan. It's a lake made by the Russian equivalent of this, residual activity and all. It does have activity to this day. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lake_Chagan
Robert w One major difference between plowshare and Fukushima is quantity of material. Plutonium is not the main contributor of the hazardous activity at Fukushima either. The uranium fission products and those that are water soluble are the problem, cesium for one. Reactor operation is an ongoing issue for many countries. The plowshare program is over and done with, not a current risk that must be managed. Recoiling at anything nuclear related doesn't do much for any kind of discussion.
I flew RB-57 aircraft against Cabriolet and Buggy. We flew through the "dust cloud" after the larger rocks had fallen out. We collected particular and gaseous matter for the scientists to analyze after the tests.
Wow, that is amazing.
Did the aircraft ventilation system filter out the radioactive substances in the air or did you wear a respirator?
a kiss from a rose???????Someone stole that intro music for a major motion picture or a hit single I’m sure.
At 14:15 if that was the device it didn't look to be the ideal set-up for transporting it.
Starting at 20:50, it sounds like this video admits to the existence of a Neutron Bomb at least as far back as 1964.
film said - make life better with nuclear explosions
@luridplanet Yes.
Plowshare wasn't bad considered you could move a hill in a single blast. Other than that, I can't think of any other means for using atomic explosives.
They are quite useful to turn your particular enemy to dust.
Forget what I said... didn't watch the whole movie yet.
@anthonyc31 He's not the one claiming that a 150kt explosion at 50 meters depth would cause a localized precision cave-in. Hell screw it ground zero is not in the middle of a desert, why don't you go test your little theory with a dosimeter?
It is a shame that our species is not unanimously accountable enough to safely utilize the relatively inexpensive, yet enormous earth shaping potential of nuclear power.
Robert w regarding the enormous optimism during the plowshare programs for moving earth. Context? Keep in mind there is no safe arrangement of accountability for this tool.
Robert w oh. So I was advocating the use of this tool? This is news to me. I found it refreshing that this video was entirely in the context of using the supercritical reaction as a tool. As foolish as that may be. Nobody talks about that way. Obviously, it is something that can never be used. I wonder how long it will be until new technology is discovered that must remain unanimously off limits. By the way, you come off as imperceptive.
Robert w just nope. No thanks for trying to subvert what I said.
+Robert w seriously though, Fukushima is just a bad comparison to these tests. Both are really different things. Something more related to this might be Lake Chagan of Kazakhstan. It's a lake made by the Russian equivalent of this, residual activity and all. It does have activity to this day. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lake_Chagan
Robert w One major difference between plowshare and Fukushima is quantity of material. Plutonium is not the main contributor of the hazardous activity at Fukushima either. The uranium fission products and those that are water soluble are the problem, cesium for one. Reactor operation is an ongoing issue for many countries.
The plowshare program is over and done with, not a current risk that must be managed.
Recoiling at anything nuclear related doesn't do much for any kind of discussion.
@anunnaki2006 Wrong on all counts.
OMG No end to rotten ideas.
search for project pluto