NationStates Jolt Archive

I was hearing some stuff durring the "I make this new bomb!" Phase of NS a week ago, and the Cobalt Bomb came up when someone tried the Carbon Bomb.

I heard some stuff on how it was about the same destruction of the Uranium bomb (used on Japan in WW2), but had a longer and more devistating and killing radiation level.

Such a weapon interests me MAD-wise, and was wondering if anyone knew anything about this C-Bomb.

OOC: Well they are a major plot point in On The Beach. From what I understand, they simply are a fission or fusion device laced with Colbalt-60, they are optomized for creating large amounts of fallout. The idea being to blanket enemy population centers with radioactive material, then 12 years or so later your populace can move in. Its kind of the precursor to neutron weapons.

So, it is more of a quick-stirke to get rid of masses bomb and than has a small half-life so you can continue with life a few years later?

The cobalt bomb uses cobalt in the shell, and the fusion neutrons convert the cobalt into cobalt-60, a powerful long-term (5 years) emitter of gamma rays. In general this type of weapon is referred to as a salted bomb and variable fallout effects can be obtained by using different salting isotopes. Gold has been proposed for short-term fallout (days), tantalum and zinc for fallout of intermediate duration (months), and cobalt for long term contamination (years). The primary purpose of this weapon is to create excess radioactive fallout making a large region uninhabitable. No cobalt or other salted bomb has been built or tested publicly.

- Wikipedia

Wow, thanks, this'll help me a lot.

Any idea on the size of the explosion?

I think. I'm not sure about the half-life of cobalt-60 though.

half-life of cobalt-60 is 5.26 years

Yeah, the half-life would be nice, too. I am thinking the explosion would be simular to a 15MT hydrogen bomb, but I am still unsure as this is very different for me.

half-life of cobalt-60 is 5.26 years

Sweeet, thanks man. Still with the explosion size, any thinkers?

The explosion size depends on the nuclear weapon(since almost any size can be laced with Cobalt-60).
There was a calculator that made everything out, but it seems to be lost.

Hmm, well, what if I wanted it to equal 2x the size of Hirroshima's? About how big would it be from estimates?

Found it!
http://www.stardestroyer.net/Empire/Science/Nuke.html

Hiroshima was about 15 KT so that would be .015 on the input section.

We ignorez t3h kobalt baum.
*ahem*
Sorry, n00b stuck in my throat. We ignore this bomb because it's a godmode, simply put, it's a one-shot nation killer that takes all the fun out of war and diplomacy. It's a "bang-you're-dead" situation even worse than the one encountered with n00kz.

In real life cobolt bombs create an EMP pulse to disrupt out all electrical within an area about a couple hudred yards in radius.

Well, yes. So do all other fission and fusion based nuclear weapons. But if this bomb is going to detonate, I don't think that a couple hundred yards of dead electronics is going to matter much when it detonates and destroys everyone in that radius anyway, now will it?

Interesting... out of interest what's a carbon bomb? Do you mean a graphite bomb?

We ignorez t3h kobalt baum.
*ahem*
Sorry, n00b stuck in my throat. We ignore this bomb because it's a godmode, simply put, it's a one-shot nation killer that takes all the fun out of war and diplomacy. It's a "bang-you're-dead" situation even worse than the one encountered with n00kz.How would a, say, 1mt cobalt salted bomb be a *nationkiller*?

Heck, for NS purposes, *gigaton* yields aren't enough to kill a nation (The exception being hyperurbanised areas).

We ignorez t3h kobalt baum.
*ahem*
Sorry, n00b stuck in my throat. We ignore this bomb because it's a godmode, simply put, it's a one-shot nation killer that takes all the fun out of war and diplomacy. It's a "bang-you're-dead" situation even worse than the one encountered with n00kz.
The US Expiremented with these in the early '60s.

The point of a cobalt bomb is quite simple: while overall similar to a fission bomb, it creates radioactive particles and fallout which are heavier and are not easily dispersed by air, in effect irradiating an area for an extended period of time. If anyone wants to check this out, watch "Dr. Strangelove, or How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love The Bomb." I don't believe the blast radius or initial area of destruction are any greater than that of a conventional nuclear weapon, however. I see no problem with this.

We ignorez t3h kobalt baum.
*ahem*
Sorry, n00b stuck in my throat. We ignore this bomb because it's a godmode, simply put, it's a one-shot nation killer that takes all the fun out of war and diplomacy. It's a "bang-you're-dead" situation even worse than the one encountered with n00kz.
???

How, pray tell, are they more dengerous than a normal nuclear weapon?

A cobalt is translated into a Neutron in some places in NS, particularly in FT. Neutron are designed to kill living organisms, and not damage anything (although the detonation site would be damaged). A cobalt is different to a Neutron though because Neutron tend to be instant kill, cobalt would take a little time unless you're in the immediate blast area.

Just a fact I thought I should share.

Nuclearweapon FAQ Cobalt Bomb (http://nuclearweaponarchive.org/Nwfaq/Nfaq1.html#nfaq1.6)

This should *really* settle it.

PS: I'm under the assumption that the 'worldwide doom' scenario needs a truly ludicrous yield/ amount of cobalt in order to produce enough cobalt 60 to contaminate the entire planet without it being spread so thin that nobody gives a damn.

Nuclearweapon FAQ Cobalt Bomb (http://nuclearweaponarchive.org/Nwfaq/Nfaq1.html#nfaq1.6)

This should *really* settle it.

PS: I'm under the assumption that the 'worldwide doom' scenario needs a truly ludicrous yield in order to produce enough cobalt 60 to contaminate the entire planet without it being spread so thin that nobody gives a damn.

Thank you for posting that. Way to do some research.

How would a, say, 1mt cobalt salted bomb be a *nationkiller*?

Heck, for NS purposes, *gigaton* yields aren't enough to kill a nation (The exception being hyperurbanised areas).
Fact is we ignore all nukes reguardless of yeild, except for dirty bombs, because they're generally such bad role-play. And before you say anything, yes, I know how hypocritical this is.

Fact is we ignore all nukes reguardless of yeild, except for dirty bombs, because they're generally such bad role-play.'We' sounds inappropriate. I don't. And, amusingly enough, no, they aren't necessarily bad roleplay.

And, more to the point, if you ignore them, oh, please do, but it isn't exactly necessary for you to invade a random thread with some semi- comical 'RAR! I IGNOREZ YUO!'. Bad form, really. Especially since in such a case, it isn't ignoring, but becomes bitching.

Which is somewhat pointless when you're ignoring it, anyway, no?

'We' sounds inappropriate. I don't. And, amusingly enough, no, they aren't necessarily bad roleplay.

And, more to the point, if you ignore them, oh, please do, but it isn't exactly necessary for you to invade a random thread with some semi- comical 'RAR! I IGNOREZ YUO!'. Bad form, really. Especially since in such a case, it isn't ignoring, but becomes bitching.

Which is somewhat pointless when you're ignoring it, anyway, no?
"We" is referring to my nation in-character, as opposed to "I" which would be referring to me out-of-character.
Come to think of it, "I" is probably more appropriate, considering ignoring is an OOC action. Bah.

As for the actual text of my thread, I understand it could be misconstrued as bad form, but I'm really just saying that if I ignore it, others are likely to also. And sense at the time the Cobalt bomb was characterized in this thread as a nation-killer, that's what I went on as my reason. If I had known what I now know after your informative post, would I have posted? Probably not, I'd just assume someone else would take the bad rap for pointing out that a lot of people ignore nukes.

So let's end the hijack, hm?

I was just looking for a bomb that would leave a low amount of radiation, not a long-lasting effect, and after reading somewhere about the Cobalt Bomb I thought it was a good high-radiation short half-life element that could be used.

After seeing that Zinc actually has a lower half-life, mind giving me any in-sight into that? I am just looking for a nuclear weapon I can use on my own soil in defence agenst massed invaders, not offencively or anything.

Well... if your facing lots of tanks try a enhanced-radiation bomb.. or as it is better a neutron bomb. You see the neutron bomb was designed for one purpose... to kill off masses of Soviet tank crews(while leaving the tanks(mostly)intact). The thing about the neutron bomb as opposed to other tactical nuclear weapons(since Neutron bombs use a fission trigger within the 1/4th to 3 kiloton range) is that its blast, fallout, and heat is so scalled back that it is hardly a factor anymore. However what is improved is INITIAL(as in immediate) Gamma radiation released. there is only one kind of material the can stop Gamma radiation... 5 feet of solid soil. All other metals are useless(even lead). The gamma radiation released is so powerful that tank crews(inside their tanks) at 2 miles from ground zero will be disabled in 5 minutes and killed within hours by radiation sickness.

Well, what if I wanted something that is kinda blast-ish, but is a good nuclear weapon all around. I saw in that URL placed the Gold Bomb, as it has a 3 day (rounded) half-life, and was wondering a lot about that, since I will be using this to defend my country from invasion forces.

OOC:I heard someone used lead in his bombs :P . Dont know HOW you could get a fission process going with lead... or gold... or silver... or any material other than uranium and plutonium that is.

Hmm, well, I am taking as the bases, not to start it. Yes, I belive I saw that it uses Uranium to create fission, which in turn, fusses the Gold (or as the original topic, Cobalt). I am enw at nuclear physics and stuff of that nature, so I could be very wrong.

BUMP for any opinions on the Gold or Zinc Bomb?

A gold bomb is going to be extremely expensive. Considering that generally on NS, 1 RL day = 1 year, cobalt might be the best way to go anyway. Just wait a decade or two before moving in.

BUMP for any opinions on the Gold or Zinc Bomb?

Secret IC:
Whittier is seeking a zinc bomb. We offer your nation 234 billion dollars to assist in the development of your own bomb.

However what is improved is INITIAL(as in immediate) Gamma radiation released. there is only one kind of material the can stop Gamma radiation... 5 feet of solid soil. All other metals are useless(even lead). The gamma radiation released is so powerful that tank crews(inside their tanks) at 2 miles from ground zero will be disabled in 5 minutes and killed within hours by radiation sickness.Wrong on all accounts (tm).

1. It ain't gamma rays. It's neutrons. Hence, neutron bomb.

2. Incorrect. Use enough material and you can stop gamma rays. A good amount of $Material (Like, say, lead) will stop it.

3. Yes, Gamma radiation is powerful. It ionises the materials in the bomb and the atmosphere it is released into, transfering energy, resulting in the bomb being vaporised and the air expanding, rapidly, which accounts for the blast (In the process, Gamma rays are transformed into X rays, though, which continue the thing).

In other words, a Gamma- ray release... lets say, specialised bomb would be a big blast, not a killer through radiation (Well, not in the sense it is usually used, anyway...).

Neutrons on the other hand just shoot through the area, without interacting too much with the atmosphere, while doing internal damage to organic materials. Like, say, humans. With the initial kinetic energy of the neutrons allowing them to effectively penetrate, say, armour (I think).

Well, what if I wanted something that is kinda blast-ish, but is a good nuclear weapon all around. I saw in that URL placed the Gold Bomb, as it has a 3 day (rounded) half-life, and was wondering a lot about that, since I will be using this to defend my country from invasion forces.Two options: 1. A clean bomb. optimised to release an initial, massive gamma ray burst, resulting in an effective blast, while at the same time built to use up almost all of the fissionable material, this resulting in there not being enough dangerous fallout. While the gamma rays get used up through interaction with the atmosphere. Minimal lasting radiation.

2. The aforementioned neutron bomb. Minimal blast, lotsa radiation, but, again, not all that long- lasting.

OOC:I heard someone used lead in his bombs :P

Yes, his name was 'The Soviet Union' and it was used to replace the third-stage tamper in the 'Tsar Bomba' two-stage test in this weird game called 'real life.'

Well, if I was to make two bombs, Neutron and Zinc (As Whittier as placed some interest in that bomb), would the Zinc be a good defencive weapon, seeing how its half-life is a little less than a year.

As to the Neutron Bomb, I would be joyed to use it as an anti-personale bomb to save some valuable weaponry like guns, tanks, and as mentioned above, anything else.

What would the half-life be for a Neutron Bomb, jw?

Neutrons (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neutron), and Neutron Bombs (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_weapon) -- hit control+F and type 'Neutron bombs', or just scroll down or use the content system to get to the relevant section.

Thanks, I did not know they had a site like this, *starts to wonder what else they got out there*

Do they have 'How to Build a 2KT Nuclear Bomb in 30 Secounds?'

Thanks, I did not know they had a site like this, *starts to wonder what else they got out there*

Do they have 'How to Build a 2KT Nuclear Bomb in 30 Secounds?'

They probably do somewhere, knowing the Internet, but you'd probably find special forces teams beating your door down before you were finished reading it :D

True, well, I might as well go the easy way out and go on eBay and buy one then, huh?

Title: "Da Zinc Bomb"
Contents:
'Bought off of eBay, this bomb is capable of a big boom and even more radiation. Its half-life is less than a year, so quick inhabitation is possable.'

Hmm, I wonder how many IGNOREs I would get.

Thanks for the Wiki stuff, I am looking into it now, and Whittier, I will make an IC post showing my development and you can post there your propossal.

True, well, I might as well go the easy way out and go on eBay and buy one then, huh?

Title: "Da Zinc Bomb"
Contents:
'Bought off of eBay, this bomb is capable of a big boom and even more radiation. Its half-life is less than a year, so quick inhabitation is possable.'

Hmm, I wonder how many IGNOREs I would get.

Thanks for the Wiki stuff, I am looking into it now, and Whittier, I will make an IC post showing my development and you can post there your propossal.

LMAO, I don't think I've seen a thread like that before. It'd be bloody funny though. "Today, Mykonia acquired 50 nuclear weapons off EBay, thanks to a seller known to us only as 'M1ck3y_44DD'. We are currently looking for rockets to fire them with, hoping to get some from Amazon on special offer..."

No problem. I've been looking up some nuclear facts, mostly about fusion reactors, neutron bombs and MOX reactors, for the past week now for various reasons, so I had them on hand anyway. Man, people are going to think I'm nuts.

LOL,

Well, I just might make a Penguin Bomb later with that, see if I could get in any sales. Wait, I'll do that now! lol.

Anways, good luck with your research and thanks for the help.

OOC:I heard someone used lead in his bombs :P . Dont know HOW you could get a fission process going with lead... or gold... or silver... or any material other than uranium and plutonium that is.

You can initiate a fission process with any heavy metal, as long as it is a unstable isotope and has a neutron emitter nearby. The only reason most people only know of Uranium and Plutonium is because these are the two used in 99% of nuclear weapons.

Neutron bombs use neutron radiation (duh), which is the second most ionising (and therefore second most dangerous to life) form of radiation. The actual blast is relatively tiny, causing little to no damage to buildings (or tanks). Radioactive contamination effects are very short-lived.

What would the half-life be for a Neutron Bomb, jw?

Neutrons have no half-life. The term 'half-life' refers to the decay of the nucleus into two (or more) parts. Neutrons are single nucleons (particles in the nucleus), so they cannot decay (therefore they have no half-life).

However what is improved is INITIAL(as in immediate) Gamma radiation released. there is only one kind of material the can stop Gamma radiation... 5 feet of solid soil. All other metals are useless(even lead).

There is NO material which guarantees to prevent penetration by gamma rays, no matter how thick. Increasing the thickness of the shield just reduces the amount which penetrates it. As gamma rays have no mass (they're rays) they interact fairly rarely, and are capable of passing through any shield. This does not mean that they always do. And lead is one of the most effective gamma inhibitors (nuclear reactors are surrounded by lead and concrete, not soil).

Mykonians, nuclear fusion reactors are, at this stage, theory or lab experiment only. Currently there is no reliable method of limiting or containing the fusion reaction and preventing the whole 'mushroom thing'.

Mykonians, nuclear fusion reactors are, at this stage, theory or lab experiment only. Currently there is no reliable method of limiting or containing the fusion reaction and preventing the whole 'mushroom thing'.

I'm well aware of that, thanks.

Sorry. It wasn't clear, so I wasn't sure. Some people think that since we have fusion bombs, we also have fusion power. I apologise again for my mistake.

How would a Zinc-72 bomb work? Zinc-72 is unstable (an isotope, of cource), and has a half-life of 46.5 hours. Zinc-65 is simular, but has a half-life of 244.26 days, which is what was sugested before.

Could both of these be used, Zn-72 for short-term radiation and Zn-65 for moderate-term radiation?

Sorry. It wasn't clear, so I wasn't sure. Some people think that since we have fusion bombs, we also have fusion power. I apologise again for my mistake.

It's alright. I'm on another forum where they think that because we don't have fusion power, we don't have fusion bombs...

How would a Zinc-72 bomb work? Zinc-72 is unstable (an isotope, of cource), and has a half-life of 46.5 hours. Zinc-65 is simular, but has a half-life of 244.26 days, which is what was sugested before.

Could both of these be used, Zn-72 for short-term radiation and Zn-65 for moderate-term radiation?

Well, yes, but you're just packing the bomb with regular zinc. It becomes radioactive after the bomb detonates and subsequently scatters it. It's possible that you could get the bomb to give you a higher isotope - however, when isotopes break down they break down into lower isotopes before becoming inert, if memory serves. Meaning that your zinc-72 will become zinc-65, in time, and overall it's all going to end up being hot longer.

How would a Zinc-72 bomb work? Zinc-72 is unstable (an isotope, of cource), and has a half-life of 46.5 hours. Zinc-65 is simular, but has a half-life of 244.26 days, which is what was sugested before.

Could both of these be used, Zn-72 for short-term radiation and Zn-65 for moderate-term radiation?

Put simply, No. Neither are really suitable for nuclear devices.

A lesson in basic nuclear physics
The half-life is (as you know) the time for half the material to decay into lighter, more stable elements. During a fission reaction (such as that involved in detonating a nuclear weapon), the radioactive material is forcefully split apart. This split creates smaller atoms, some neutrons and some energy. The neutrons are used to cause more atoms to split.

A lesson in basic nuclear weapons
The material used in the device needs to have a relatively long half-life, so that is is economically viable. Depending on how much material is in the bomb (usually just over critical mass) it will become useless after a certain amount of the material has decayed (about 5-10%), because when the reaction is triggered, there will no longer be enough material to form a supercritical mass, and no reaction occurs. Both the suggested Zinc values would be useless within a matter of weeks, if not days. The fissile material for a nuclear device requires half-lives measured in years, preferably hundreds or thousands of them, as this gives nuclear weapons that will still be effective up to fifty years after building them.

The duration of the radiation effects following a nuclear detonation relies on the half-lives of the fissile products, i.e. the materials that the fuel split into, as these are the materials that will be left after the blast. The half-lives of these material can vary from anything between half a million years to a few hours. If short-term radioactive effects are required, build a bomb using material that splits into elements with short half-lives.

In short: No matter what type of device you are building, your fuel must have a long half-life. The after-effects are related to the material produced during the reaction, not the fuel itself.
[/lesson]

If you really want to have weapons with specifically short radiation effects, I would suggest using neutron bombs for short (few days) and do some research into weapons with medium-term radiation effects (there are some, but I can't remember what they use).


Well, yes, but you're just packing the bomb with regular zinc. It becomes radioactive after the bomb detonates and subsequently scatters it. It's possible that you could get the bomb to give you a higher isotope - however, when isotopes break down they break down into lower isotopes before becoming inert, if memory serves. Meaning that your zinc-72 will become zinc-65, in time, and overall it's all going to end up being hot longer.

Incorrect. Regardless of whether the material decays naturally or split during fission, it produces isotopes of lighter metals. These isotopes may also be unstable, in which case they will decay as well, but it is always a lighter metal formed (even if only by one or two elements).

Some stuff about the "Cobalt" bomb:

It's a military impracticality. The ammount of radiation that is thrown into the atmosphere and the surrounding areas makes it a two-bladed sword. If you're going to nuke a country next to you, forget it. Your people will be just as affected by the bomb. Only inter-continental targets would be worth it. But, again, the radioactiviy would be launched into the upper-atmosphere and everyone on the planet would be affected by it.

I haven't read everything, but did anyone say that the Neutron Bomb is the ultimate "Capitalist" bomb? In other words, buildings, machines, and anything else that is inorganic (without Carbon molecules) survives. Anything that's living gets wipped out in a flash of light. Yet, the blast radius is really small and needs to be used en masse in order to bombard a city.

-The Ing

oh, yes, Co-60 weapons are a great addition to any HANE-based arsenal, unfortuneatly, my nuclear material supplier got completely vaporised, one drawback to a reigion were weapons-grade uranium.
I am working on even more stupendous WMD, tell you more when I announce it at completion.

I will begin work on the neutron bomb than. Exactly, how could I (if it is possible) make the radiation radius go farther out, about the size of a small town (use Panama City Beach, Florida as an example *city off of the top of my head*). If it is not possible, than how many bombs at what size, could do that? I will be using that information for any RPs that I would use it in.

I will begin work on the neutron bomb than. Exactly, how could I (if it is possible) make the radiation radius go farther out, about the size of a small town (use Panama City Beach, Florida as an example *city off of the top of my head*). If it is not possible, than how many bombs at what size, could do that? I will be using that information for any RPs that I would use it in.

Magic fairy pixie dust.

Seriously, we (by "we" I mean the real-life "United States") are still developing the Neutron Bomb. I say, do your own research or come up with some interesting stuff yourself.

Either that, or pray to god you know what you're talking about and blindly RP. But then the Sodomizing Monkey will come after you.

- The Ing

Yeah, neutron bombs are very much a work in progress for the western world. Russia and China have them commissioned (for several years), but Communists rarely release technical info on new rifles, let alone nuclear devices.

Since most people on NS don't give a damn as long as it is feasable, just go for it. I doubt anyone will challenge it. If they do, accept you're wrong, blame duff info and downsize it. Then upsize it again once you're finished that RP.

OOC:We are?? Because last time I checked we had them since the 70s. They were built to defend against massed Soviet tank attacks.

OOC:We are?? Because last time I checked we had them since the 70s. They were built to defend against massed Soviet tank attacks.

No, that's not a neutron bomb. I know what you're talking about, but I forget what those things are called. We're still developing the Neturon Bomb today.

-The Ing.

Well, thansk guys for the insight and now I know a little more about nuclear weaponry. Thanks, again.

OOC::Rechecks the book 'Nuclear War in the 1980s': According to this book we have had them for awhile... it says that neutron bomb is the incorrect name and Enhanced Radiation bomb is a more appropriate title. Ah well... Guess I should not trust a book that was written in the 80's :p .