Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us
Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network
Home
Discussion GroupsSpace ScienceAstronomyAmateur AstronomySpace FlightSpace StationShuttleSpace HistorySpace PolicySETI
SpaceKB.com
Contact UsLink To UsSearch & Site Map

Space Forum / Space History / July 2005



Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

Heinlein's Role in Pressure Suits?

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
Bill Higgins - 31 May 2005 19:42 GMT
What did Robert A. Heinlein do with pressure suits in World War II?

With whom did he work at the Philadelphia Navy Yard, and what contribution
did the group make to high-altitude suit development?  I can't find a good
on-line source about any such Navy work during the war, and I suspect my
books won't help much.

Heinlein himself said little directly about his war work, and even then was
vague.  Was it classified, or was he merely close-mouthed?  If it was
classified, is it *still* classified?

In his science fiction, and in his nonfiction writing, he often discussed
the problems of engineering a good space suit design, as for example in the
novel *Have Space Suit, Will Travel*.  What was his real-life experience
with these matters?

Bill Patterson, a scholar of Heinlein's work, writes at
<http://members.aol.com/agplusone/robert_a._heinlein_a_biogr.htm>:

"He and Leslyn found a house in Lansdowne, a suburb of Philadelphia, and
Heinlein went to work on what he described as 'the necessary tedium of
aviation engineering.' Although he was trained as a 'mechanical engineer
specializing in linkages,' his slight experience with aircraft on the U.S.S.
Lexington targeted him toward the Navy's aircraft program at a time when
aeronautical engineering was separating off into a specialized discipline.

"Several of his friends have noted that he was so conscientiously
close-mouthed that they never actually knew what kind of projects he was
working on, but his one surviving piece of technical writing from the period
(1944) is a report on developing plastics for aircraft canopies. He later
spoke of helping to develop the high-altitude suit, the progenitor of
today's space suits, using paradigms created by Edmond Hamilton for his
1930's space operas, and engineering details of the suit appear extensively
in Heinlein's post-war fiction. He has also spoken of running a small brain
trust out of his apartment after he and Leslyn moved from Lansdowne to
downtown Philadelphia. As well as engineering, a supervisor at the Lab
noted, he also served as 'a sort of personnel man for the Laboratory.' He
persuaded Scoles to call up Isaac Asimov -- 'practically kidnaped' is the
way he puts it -- who was doing graduate work in biochemistry at Columbia
University. He also functioned as 'a kind of one-man grievance committee.'
Heinlein was particularly adept at defusing conflicts between Naval and
civilian personnel, whose ages, experience level, and Naval rank were not
always well matched or even compatible. He was remembered as a constant
stabilizing influence amid the chaos."

Fellow science fiction author L. Sprague de Camp writes at
<http://www.lspraguedecamp.com/works/work.asp?id=177>:

"After Pearl Harbor, early in 1942, I joined the Navy as a reserve officer.
Bob Heinlein had an Annapolis classmate, Cdr..A.B.Scoles with whom he had
kept up. Scoles had been appointed director of the Materials Laboratory of
the Naval Air Material Center at the Philadelphia Navy Yard. Scoles wanted
to lure to his unit a few Science fiction authors with technical
back-grounds, to see what they could do. After I finished my basic training
I joined the lab. Heinlein came to the Yard as a civilian engineer, and
Isaac Asimov came as a chemist. Heinlein was a Regular Navy officer, retired
for medical reasons. It must have irked him to see me, green to Navy ways,
running around with pretty gold stripes on my sleeve. But he was a good
sport about it, and his advice more than once saved me from making a bigger
a.s of myself than I other-wise might have.

"For three and a half years, I navigated a desk and fought the war with a
flashing slide rule. Working in the Cold Room at temperatures even colder
than an Adirondack winter, I wore the kind of high-altitude flying suit that
fore-shadowed today's space suits. I'm sure the war would not have ended a
second sooner or later if Lt. Cdr. de Camp hadn't been there. But, at least,
I went in under my own power (though draft-proof for age and dependents) and
tried to do as I was ordered.

"Heinlein, Asimov, and I were not a committee of mad scientists inventing
secret weapons. We were assigned to different sections, such as running
tests on hydraulic valves for naval aircraft. Being close personal friends,
we got together almost every weekend, when we could spare the rationed
gasoline. As soon as the war ended, Heinlein and I went back to writing,
while Asimov was drafted into the Army and made sharpshooter and corporal by
the end of his service."

Fishing around for information about pressure suits and the U.S. Navy, I see
1930s suits for stratospheric ballooning, and 1950s suits for the Jet Age--
one USN design was adapted into the Project Mercury suit.  But I don't find
much about the war years.

A brief account at <http://www.acfnewsource.org/science/tailor_stars.html>
mentions that Russell Colley, the Goodyear engineer who developed Wiley
Post's suit, also developed Navy suits in the 1940s, and an article at
<http://inventors.about.com/od/sstartinventions/a/spacesuits.htm> suggests
that he went on to develop the Mercury suit.

Was Colley at Philadelphia during WWII? Did de Camp and Heinlein work with
Colley?

Douglas S. Crompton has a history site for the base at
<http://www.crompton.com/wa3dsp/k3nal/nawcdocs.html>, and according to his
chronology:

"July 14, 1943 --The Secretary issued a General Order forming the Naval Air
Material Center, consisting of the separate commands of the Naval Aircraft
Factory, the Naval Aircraft Modification Unit, the Naval Air Experimental
Station and the Naval Auxiliary Air Station. This action, effective 20 July,
consolidated in distinct activities the production, modification,
experimental, and air station facilities of the former Naval Aircraft
Factory organization.

"November 30, 1943 --A department of Aviation Medicine and Physiological
Research was authorized at the Naval Air Material Center, to study
physiological factors particularly as related to design of high speed and
high altitude aircraft."

Sounds promising.  I can't connect Colley with NAMC, though, nor can I
connect him (or other collaborators) with de Camp and Heinlein.
Can anyone add more?

Signature

Bill Higgins                             Internet: higgins@fnal.gov
Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory

Bill Higgins - 31 May 2005 22:37 GMT
> A brief account at <http://www.acfnewsource.org/science/tailor_stars.html>
> mentions that Russell Colley, the Goodyear engineer who developed Wiley
> Post's suit,

Did I say "Goodyear?"  I meant "B. F. Goodrich."  Ouch.

This is the 21st century.  We're not supposed to make mistakes like that
any more.

(Why don't the companies just merge and end all this confusion?
Goodrich-Goodyear.  Goodyearrich.  Goodrichyear.)

Some of Colley's colleagues were Karrol Krupp, Carl F. Effler, and D. Ewing.

Signature

            "I told him that this is                 | Bill Higgins
           what scientists do at a party."           | Fermilab
            --M. Alschuler, explaining               |
       the explosions and magnesium bonfires         | Internet:
 to the representative of the Sheriff's Department   | higgins@fnal.gov

Rusty - 31 May 2005 23:18 GMT
>> A brief account at <http://www.acfnewsource.org/science/tailor_stars.html>
>> mentions that Russell Colley, the Goodyear engineer who developed Wiley
[quoted text clipped - 9 lines]
>
>Some of Colley's colleagues were Karrol Krupp, Carl F. Effler, and D. Ewing.

B. F. Goodrich used to have a magazine ad, showing an empty blue sky
with a few clouds, along with the title, "The Goodrich Blimp".

Rusty
Kevin Willoughby - 01 Jun 2005 04:05 GMT
> Did I say "Goodyear?"  I meant "B. F. Goodrich."  Ouch.
>[...]
> (Why don't the companies just merge and end all this confusion?
> Goodrich-Goodyear.  Goodyearrich.  Goodrichyear.)

Years and years ago, Goodrich ran a full page ad in a magazine. The
bottom 1/4 of the page had a single paragraph titled "The Goodrich
Blimp". The top 3/4 was a picture of clouds in an otherwise empty sky...
Signature

Kevin Willoughby         kevinwilloughby@acm.org.invalid

The loss of the American system of checks and balances
is more of a security danger than any terrorist risk.
-- Bruce Schneier

OM - 01 Jun 2005 06:12 GMT
>Years and years ago, Goodrich ran a full page ad in a magazine. The
>bottom 1/4 of the page had a single paragraph titled "The Goodrich
>Blimp". The top 3/4 was a picture of clouds in an otherwise empty sky...

...They did TV ads with that gimmick as well that ran on Monday Night
Football for about two seasons, and IIRC they won a Clio for it too.
However, the gimmick fell flat when Fuji introduced their blimp, and
after that having a blimp was no big deal.

                OM

Signature

"No bastard ever won a war by dying for     | http://www.io.com/~o_m
his country. He won it by making the other | Sergeant-At-Arms
poor dumb bastard die for his country."    | Human O-Ring Society

    - General George S. Patton, Jr

Rhonda Lea Kirk - 01 Jun 2005 02:32 GMT
Top posted:

I'll leave it up to you, but you might want to crosspost
this to alt.fan.heinlein. They're a friendly, helpful bunch,
and if one of them doesn't know the answer, I will be
utterly amazed.

rl

> What did Robert A. Heinlein do with pressure suits in
> World War II?
[quoted text clipped - 121 lines]
> though, nor can I connect him (or other collaborators)
> with de Camp and Heinlein. Can anyone add more?
OM - 01 Jun 2005 06:14 GMT
>Top posted:

...And you're getting a spanking for it, too.

                OM

Signature

"No bastard ever won a war by dying for     | http://www.io.com/~o_m
his country. He won it by making the other | Sergeant-At-Arms
poor dumb bastard die for his country."    | Human O-Ring Society

    - General George S. Patton, Jr

Rhonda Lea Kirk - 02 Jun 2005 03:11 GMT
>> Top posted:

> ...And you're getting a spanking for it, too.

Yeah, yeah, yeah. I've been waiting...how long now? Three
years, and counting.

You need to put some action into the program, Bob.

;)
Henry Spencer - 01 Jun 2005 17:08 GMT
>"...He also functioned as 'a kind of one-man grievance committee.'
>Heinlein was particularly adept at defusing conflicts between Naval and
>civilian personnel, whose ages, experience level, and Naval rank were not
>always well matched or even compatible. He was remembered as a constant
>stabilizing influence amid the chaos."

Which is interesting, because Asimov describes him as a highly opinionated
man who did not accept disagreement gracefully -- not the sort of person
you'd expect to be an adept mediator.  Perhaps a case of professional and
private personas differing sharply.

>Fellow science fiction author L. Sprague de Camp writes...
>"...Working in the Cold Room at temperatures even colder
>than an Adirondack winter, I wore the kind of high-altitude flying suit that
>fore-shadowed today's space suits..."

de Camp seems to be referring to suits built for warmth rather than for
pressurization; the connection to spacesuits would seem a loose one.
Signature

"Think outside the box -- the box isn't our friend."    |   Henry Spencer
                               -- George Herbert       | henry@spsystems.net

Bill Higgins - 02 Jun 2005 18:59 GMT
[but I was quoting Bill Patterson]

>> "...He also functioned as 'a kind of one-man grievance committee.'
>> Heinlein was particularly adept at defusing conflicts between Naval and
[quoted text clipped - 6 lines]
> you'd expect to be an adept mediator.  Perhaps a case of professional and
> private personas differing sharply.

Yes.  Also, perhaps his naval experience and legendary gentlemanliness
trumped this abrasiveness, for some people at least.

>> Fellow science fiction author L. Sprague de Camp writes...
>> "...Working in the Cold Room at temperatures even colder
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
> de Camp seems to be referring to suits built for warmth rather than for
> pressurization; the connection to spacesuits would seem a loose one.

I fear that turns out not to be the case.  We already know that there was
pressure-suit work going on at Philadelphia, because Heinlein was somehow
involved in it.  And would de Camp describe a warm fuzzy coverall as
fore-shadowing today's space suits?  I doubt it.

After a trip to a bookcase in my basement, I can now report that Heinlein
wrote in *The Science Fiction Novel* (the Advent symposium edited by Basil
Davenport):

"When we got into the war he [Bud Scoles] sent for me, put me in charge of
a high-altitude laboratory of which one of the projects was the development
of a space suit (then called a high-altitude pressure suit.)  I worked on
it for a short while, then was relieved by L. Sprague de Camp, who is an
aeronautical and mechanical engineer as well as a writer; he carried on
with this research all through the war, testing and developing many space
suits.""

A couple of correspondents suggested I post my query to alt.fan.heinlein,
where Bill Patterson was kind enough to reply, explaining that damage to
Heinlein's lungs from his old bout of tuberculosis rendered him an
unsuitable subject for high-altitude work, so he was given another job and
de Camp replaced him.

As yet, I still don't know who built the suits, what the Naval Air
Material Center testing program was like, or who else worked there.

One valuable clue:  Russell Colley's group at B.F. Goodrich developed the XH
series of suits, notably the XH-5, for the Navy, so it seems likely that
these suits were the ones Heinlein and de Camp worked with.  But I haven't
yet nailed down this possible connection.

This document might clinch it: "Developmental history of the aviator's full
pressure suit in the U.S. Navy" by C.F. Gell, E. L. Hays, and J. V.
Correale, in *Journal of Aviation Medicine* for April 1959, volume 30,
number 4, pages 241-250.

<http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=1
3641178&dopt=Abstract
>

It's not online, alas.

Signature

   ___   O~~*        /_) ' / /   /_/ '  ,   ,  ' ,_  _           \|/
  /  / - ~ -~~~~~~~~/_) / / /   / / / (_) (_) / / / _\~~~~~~~~~~~zap!
 /__//       \                       (_) (_)                    / | \
     |       |   Bill Higgins   Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory
     \       /
       -   -     Internet:                           higgins@fnal.gov
         ~       New! Improved! Now with THREE great neutrino flavors!

Vance P. Frickey - 02 Jun 2005 21:10 GMT
Try contacting David Clark, Inc for historical
info on high-altitude suits.  They build our
present-day space suits, have since (I think)
Project Gemini (and before that, for pilots of the
X-Planes).

They are better known for making radio/intercom
headsets and hearing protectors for the aviation
industry.

Their Web site
http://www.davidclark.com/Aerospace/aerospac.shtml
says they've been in the business since 1941
(pressure suits for bomber crews and such), made
the X-1 and X-15 suits, and space suits since
Gemini (at least).  It's possible there's an
archivist who can help you with any legacy
information they got from Navy's Philadelphia
high-pressure shop or BF Goodrich.

Might be worth a try, anyway
Signature

Vance P. Frickey
vfrickey@ricochet.com

"There is an uncomfortable similarity between
Damocles, who had everything but security, and the
West today. The main difference is that Damocles
could see the sword that threatened him and the
thin thread that restrained it, while today both
sword and thread seem unreal to all too many."

Herman Kahn, _On Thermonuclear War_.

>> In article
>> <Pine.SGI.4.60L.0505311334520.10424915@fsgi01.fnal.gov>,
[quoted text clipped - 89 lines]
>
> It's not online, alas.
Andrew Gray - 08 Jun 2005 20:17 GMT
> This document might clinch it: "Developmental history of the aviator's full
> pressure suit in the U.S. Navy" by C.F. Gell, E. L. Hays, and J. V.
> Correale, in *Journal of Aviation Medicine* for April 1959, volume 30,
> number 4, pages 241-250.

A check shows that the University of Chicago has vol. 30 of the JoAM, as
does the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign (though I think
that's at the other end of the state, if my geography is correct) and
the University of Illinois at Chicago. Don't know what their access
policies are, but a photocopy's probably acquirable should you poke
around a bit.

Signature

-Andrew Gray
andrew.gray@dunelm.org.uk

Terrell Miller - 04 Jun 2005 14:41 GMT
> Heinlein himself said little directly about his war work, and even then
> was vague.  Was it classified, or was he merely close-mouthed?  If it
> was classified, is it *still* classified?

well, Heinlein was one of those (along with Will Jenkins, Asimov and
Campbell) implicated in the "atom bomb leak" investigation during the
war. I forget the name of the writer, but one of Campbell's regular
contributors wrote a short story that had very realistic descriptions of
an atomic weapon...several years *before* Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

Turns out that the info was readily availbale in teh physics literature
of the time, but the FBI and local police went absolutely batshit for a
while there, and it's a wonder nobody went to jail.

So Heinlein might have been naturally reticent to discuss *anything* he
did during the war, just to be safe.

<snip>

> as 'a kind of one-man grievance committee.' Heinlein was particularly
> adept at defusing conflicts between Naval and civilian personnel, whose
> ages, experience level, and Naval rank were not always well matched or
> even compatible. He was remembered as a constant stabilizing influence
> amid the chaos."

sounds like a "let's compromise, we'll all do it *my* way" scenario <g>

Signature

Terrell Miller
millerto@bellsouth.net

"Suddenly, after nearly 30 years of scorn, Prog is cool again".
-Entertainment Weekly

Henry Spencer - 04 Jun 2005 17:47 GMT
>...I forget the name of the writer, but one of Campbell's regular
>contributors wrote a short story that had very realistic descriptions of
>an atomic weapon...several years *before* Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

Cleve Cartmill.  The description actually was rather vague (I've read the
story), but realistic enough to get people excited.

Algis Budrys noted once that Cartmill had zero background in technology,
and that the story is not at all typical of his work.  Moreover, it is
really bad, pulp-era hackwork -- the sort of story that Campbell had moved
Astounding strongly away from by setting higher standards.  It looks very
much like Cartmill was just the front man, and this was Campbell rattling
some cages to try to find out whether anything was really going on.

>Turns out that the info was readily availbale in teh physics literature
>of the time...

Many people don't realize that atomic bombs *were* in the open literature,
not just as obscure physics papers but as explicit speculation on the
military possibilities, for anyone who was paying attention.  However,
they were generally seen as a far-future possibility, not something that
was likely to enter the picture soon.  What was secret about the Manhattan
Project was not that atomic bombs were theoretically possible, but that
the US was making a massive effort to build them ASAP.

"May we hope that attempts to release the unimaginable energy locked in
uranium atoms, on a useful scale, remain complete and unmitigated failures
until such time as the family fight in Europe is concluded?"
    -- John W. Campbell, Astounding Nov. 1939 (!!), page 78

Signature

"Think outside the box -- the box isn't our friend."    |   Henry Spencer
                               -- George Herbert       | henry@spsystems.net

Pat Flannery - 05 Jun 2005 00:24 GMT
>Cleve Cartmill.  The description actually was rather vague (I've read the
>story), but realistic enough to get people excited.
>
>  

Want to read something scary? Paris gets nuked from H.G. Wells' "The
World Set Free" from 1914:

"Her eyes went to the face of the Marshal as a frightened child
might look towards its mother.

He was still serene.  He was frowning slightly, she thought, but
that was natural enough, for the Earl of Delhi, with one hand
gauntly gesticulating, had taken him by the arm and was all too
manifestly disposed to drag him towards the great door that
opened on the terrace. And Viard was hurrying towards the huge
windows and doing so in the strangest of attitudes, bent forward
and with eyes upturned.

Something up there?

And then it was as if thunder broke overhead.

The sound struck her like a blow.  She crouched together against
the masonry and looked up.  She saw three black shapes swooping
down through the torn clouds, and from a point a little below two
of them, there had already started curling trails of red....

Everything else in her being was paralysed, she hung through
moments that seemed infinities, watching those red missiles whirl
down towards her.

She felt torn out of the world.  There was nothing else in the
world but a crimson-purple glare and sound, deafening,
all-embracing, continuing sound.  Every other light had gone out
about her and against this glare hung slanting walls, pirouetting
pillars, projecting fragments of cornices, and a disorderly
flight of huge angular sheets of glass.  She had an impression of
a great ball of crimson-purple fire like a maddened living thing
that seemed to be whirling about very rapidly amidst a chaos of
falling masonry, that seemed to be attacking the earth furiously,
that seemed to be burrowing into it like a blazing rabbit . . .

She had all the sensations of waking up out of a dream.

She found she was lying face downward on a bank of mould and that
a little rivulet of hot water was running over one foot. She
tried to raise herself and found her leg was very painful. She
was not clear whether it was night or day nor where she was; she
made a second effort, wincing and groaning, and turned over and
got into a sitting position and looked about her.

Everything seemed very silent.  She was, in fact, in the midst of
a vast uproar, but she did not realise this because her hearing
had been destroyed.

At first she could not join on what she saw to any previous
experience.

She seemed to be in a strange world, a soundless, ruinous world,
a world of heaped broken things.  And it was lit--and somehow
this was more familiar to her mind than any other fact about
her--by a flickering, purplish-crimson light.  Then close to her,
rising above a confusion of debris, she recognised the Trocadero;
it was changed, something had gone from it, but its outline was
unmistakable. It stood out against a streaming, whirling uprush
of red-lit steam. And with that she recalled Paris and the Seine
and the warm, overcast evening and the beautiful, luminous
organisation of the War Control....

She drew herself a little way up the slope of earth on which she
lay, and examined her surroundings with an increasing
understanding....

The earth on which she was lying projected like a cape into the
river. Quite close to her was a brimming lake of dammed-up water,
from which these warm rivulets and torrents were trickling. Wisps
of vapour came into circling existence a foot or so from its
mirror-surface. Near at hand and reflected exactly in the water
was the upper part of a familiar-looking stone pillar.  On the
side of her away from the water the heaped ruins rose steeply in
a confused slope up to a glaring crest.  Above and reflecting
this glare towered pillowed masses of steam rolling swiftly
upward to the zenith. It was from this crest that the livid glow
that lit the world about her proceeded, and slowly her mind
connected this mound with the vanished buildings of the War
Control."

Pat
Alan Jones - 05 Jun 2005 04:23 GMT
>"May we hope that attempts to release the unimaginable energy locked in
>uranium atoms, on a useful scale, remain complete and unmitigated failures
>until such time as the family fight in Europe is concluded?"
>    -- John W. Campbell, Astounding Nov. 1939 (!!), page 78

Can you imagine Russia doing a nuclear scorched earth retreat?
Peter Stickney - 05 Jun 2005 09:05 GMT
>> Heinlein himself said little directly about his war work, and even
>> then
[quoted text clipped - 7 lines]
> descriptions of an atomic weapon...several years *before* Hiroshima
> and Nagasaki.

Heinlein did write "Solution Unsatisfactory" at about that time, IIRC,
and it did involve nuclear weaponry, albeit what we nowadays call
Radiological Warfare - dusting something down with hot stuff.

Not quite the Los Alamos Special, but that is a method that has been
bandied about as a possible German fallback strategy when they
discovered that they didn't have the resources to build a bomb.
(Fairly early on, actually, they'd buggered up some key
calculations.)
Of course, to do that, in any appreciable time, they'd need a working
nuclear reactor.  Something they also weren't close to doing.

> Turns out that the info was readily availbale in teh physics
> literature of the time, but the FBI and local police went absolutely
> batshit for a while there, and it's a wonder nobody went to jail.
>
> So Heinlein might have been naturally reticent to discuss *anything*
> he did during the war, just to be safe.

He would have been anyway - it's the nature of his Annapolis years.
Find the letter that he wrote to John Campbell about John's
correspondence with L. Ron Hubbard.  Hubbard was an excellent
small-boat sailor, and was doing something dashing and mysterious.
Campbell was sending him a bunch of stuff, which included some
measure (for large measures) of criticism of the War Effort.
Heinlein tells Campbell to lay off Hubbard, (In part, because he
thinks Elron's a bit twitchy) and offers himself as a sounding board,
due in part to his deeper level of indoctrination and training.  He
describes the Service Academy process excellently, and how it goes
about building the level of, for lack of a better term,
"steadfastness" that's required.  It's a perfect description of how
this indoctrination is done, be it at Annapolis, West Point, Colorado
Springs, the Jesuits, or the People's Liberation Army.

Signature

Pete Stickney
Java Man knew nothing about coffee.

Pat Flannery - 05 Jun 2005 16:24 GMT
>Not quite the Los Alamos Special, but that is a method that has been
>bandied about as a possible German fallback strategy when they
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
>nuclear reactor.  Something they also weren't close to doing.
>  

They might have been able to make some isotopes via bombardment of
uranium using either highly radioactive elements or possibly something
along the line of high powered X-ray equipment. Check the story of "The
Radioactive Boy Scout" out:
http://www.dangerouslaboratories.org/radscout.html
But nerve gas was far easier to manufacture, and a lot more predictable
in its results. An area bombarded by isotopes would have no immediate
effect on those exposed, and would remain dangerous to enter for years
afterward. Not a good idea for a weapon where you may want to destroy
enemy troops, but get your own troops into the same area in a fairly
short time afterward.
The closet thing to isotope bombardment would have been the British
anthrax experiments during the war; that also would have led to areas
with a long-lived contamination problem.

Pat
Henry Spencer - 05 Jun 2005 19:45 GMT
>They might have been able to make some isotopes via bombardment of
>uranium using either highly radioactive elements or possibly something
>along the line of high powered X-ray equipment.

Neither, actually:  they'd use a cyclotron.  That's how the first samples
of plutonium were made, for example.  But to make sizable quantities of
isotopes you'd need a whole lot of cyclotrons -- what you'd get, in fact,
would be something looking very much like the Oak Ridge calutron
isotope-separation plant, a massive industrial plant eating huge amounts
of power.  With the added complication that both the output and (after the
first prolonged production run) the plant itself would be radioactive.

Various types of large accelerator facilities -- usually linear rather
than cyclotrons, but that's a detail -- have appeared occasionally in
proposals for things like tritium production and nuclear-waste disposal.
To date, it's always been easier to get neutrons from a reactor.

>...An area bombarded by isotopes would have no immediate
>effect on those exposed, and would remain dangerous to enter for years
>afterward. Not a good idea for a weapon where you may want to destroy
>enemy troops, but get your own troops into the same area in a fairly
>short time afterward.

The immediate effect comes not from the isotopes, but from the big bright
red "DANGER! RADIOACTIVE AREA!" signs you plant along with the isotopes.
Pat is right that this doesn't make a good tactical weapon for maneuver
warfare... but as part of fortifications, it's potentially useful.  After
all, who (except the French) cares if French beaches suitable for landing
an invasion on are dangerously radioactive for the next twenty years?
Signature

"Think outside the box -- the box isn't our friend."    |   Henry Spencer
                               -- George Herbert       | henry@spsystems.net

Pat Flannery - 05 Jun 2005 22:29 GMT
>Neither, actually:  they'd use a cyclotron.  That's how the first samples
>of plutonium were made, for example.  But to make sizable quantities of
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
>first prolonged production run) the plant itself would be radioactive.
>  

The kid in the "The Radioactive Boy Scout" article managed to
isotopicly contaminate his garage with the use of some americium from
smoke detectors, radium paint, thorium from gas lamp mantles, lithium
from batteries, beryllium stolen from his school chemistry lab and
pitchblende ore hammered down into dust.
Having got that all to work, he then moved forward with the construction
of his isotope breeder reactor:
http://www.dangerouslaboratories.org/radscout.html
This of course required more high tech equipment... it was time to to
get the duct tape out. :-D

>The immediate effect comes not from the isotopes, but from the big bright
>red "DANGER! RADIOACTIVE AREA!" signs you plant along with the isotopes.
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
>an invasion on are dangerously radioactive for the next twenty years?
>  


During the Vietnam War we looked into the idea of using an isotopic
border defense between North and South Vietnam.

Pat
Ad absurdum per aspera - 23 Jun 2005 16:20 GMT
> During the Vietnam War we looked into the idea of using an
> isotopic border defense between North and South Vietnam.

This may be more sci.inner-space.history,* but I stumbled across a
pretty scary reference in Captain E. John Long, USN (Ret.),  _New
Worlds of Oceanography_, New York: Pyramid Press (1965), p. 128:

    Military strategists warn us that enemy submarines
    could drop atomic wastes or concentrated raw atomic
    materials deliberately in the best fishing grounds,
    beginning a chain reaction [did he mean this in the
    nuclear sense or the food-chain sense or both? -jtc]
    of atomic poisoning from plankton to fish to man.

    Another method of nuclear poisoning of the sea
    would be to plant by submarines some of the
    more deadly atomic reagents.  These in turn
    may destroy the base of the food chain completely,
    and progressively decimate by starvation
    the larger fishes.  Are there any reagents for
    this kind of planktonic warfare?  Not as far as
    we know, but we can hope and try, and redouble
    our research.

Doesn't sound like anything we'd hope for nowadays, and it's especially
incongruous in the context of Captain Long's appreciation, expressed in
many other places, for marine aspects of the emergent science of
ecology and of pollution control (radiological and otherwise).
Nonetheless there it is...  How seriously it was taken as a potential
offensive weapon, rather than a possibility of something an enemy might
do that we would therefore need to understand, I dunno.

--Joe

* Actually it's not all that off topic.  Those times were as
fascinating and fast-evolving in ocean exploration (which Long does an
estimable and marvelously readable job of surveying for the layman) as
in space exploration -- and there were some links between the two.  Not
just Scott Carpenter's eclectic interests, but also the dawn of weather
satellites and what they could do to help observe the interaction of
oceans and atmosphere, and an quote that Captain Long (whose belief in
the efficacy of the latest shark repellents was not borne out by the
years) relays from an unnamed astronaut:  "I'd hate to go into orbit
and splash into the sea only to be eaten by a shark.  What an
anticlimax!"
Terrell Miller - 24 Jun 2005 01:48 GMT
> This may be more sci.inner-space.history,* but I stumbled across a
> pretty scary reference in Captain E. John Long, USN (Ret.),  _New
[quoted text clipped - 6 lines]
>      nuclear sense or the food-chain sense or both? -jtc]
>      of atomic poisoning from plankton to fish to man.

just wondering how they could get enough atomic waste to do large-scale
contamination abouard a sub without frying the crew...

Signature

Terrell Miller
millerto@bellsouth.net

"Suddenly, after nearly 30 years of scorn, Prog is cool again".
-Entertainment Weekly

Jonathan Silverlight - 05 Jun 2005 22:48 GMT
>>...An area bombarded by isotopes would have no immediate
>>effect on those exposed, and would remain dangerous to enter for years
[quoted text clipped - 8 lines]
>all, who (except the French) cares if French beaches suitable for landing
>an invasion on are dangerously radioactive for the next twenty years?

I did a search for "radiological weapons" and "world war II" because I
recalled reading somewhere that the Allies had considered using them
(which must have caused some alarm when RAH wrote "Solution
Unsatisfactory")
I didn't find that, but I did find a reference
<http://encyclopedia.thefreedictionary.com/Radiological%20bomb> that
says
"Saddam Hussein is reported to have tested a radiological weapon in 1987
for use against Iran. This weapon was found to be impractical because
the radioactive isotopes in the weapon would decay _quickly_, rendering
it useless within a week after the weapon was manufactured."
Doesn't say which isotopes they used, though.
Signature

Remove spam and invalid from address to reply.

Pat Flannery - 06 Jun 2005 04:43 GMT
> I did a search for "radiological weapons" and "world war II" because I
> recalled reading somewhere that the Allies had considered using them
[quoted text clipped - 7 lines]
> rendering it useless within a week after the weapon was manufactured."
> Doesn't say which isotopes they used, though.

The Soviets played around with a radiological warhead named "Geran" for
their R-2 (improved V-2) missile prior to abandoning it for a true
nuclear warhead: http://www.astronautix.com/lvs/r2.htm
I think Geran was sort of a back-up scheme in case they ran into
problems with their bomb project.
I always wondered if that was based on some research that the Germans
did that they got their hands on after the war.

Pat
OM - 06 Jun 2005 01:49 GMT
>Oak Ridge calutron

..."Calutron" or "Calliotron", Henry? I've seen this spelled both ways
in reference to this, and I'm curious which is correct.

                OM

Signature

"No bastard ever won a war by dying for     | http://www.io.com/~o_m
his country. He won it by making the other | Sergeant-At-Arms
poor dumb bastard die for his country."    | Human O-Ring Society

    - General George S. Patton, Jr

Henry Spencer - 06 Jun 2005 03:58 GMT
>>Oak Ridge calutron
>
>..."Calutron" or "Calliotron", Henry? I've seen this spelled both ways
>in reference to this, and I'm curious which is correct.

Rhodes's "The Making of the Atomic Bomb" and Krass et al's "Uranium
Enrichment and Nuclear Weapon Proliferation" agree that it's "calutron",
from University of California (Lawrence's home base and the site of its
invention).  The name seems to have been fairly arbitrary, and I speculate
that it was chosen for wartime secrecy:  a short, convenient name that
didn't advertise just what the thing was.
Signature

"Think outside the box -- the box isn't our friend."    |   Henry Spencer
                               -- George Herbert       | henry@spsystems.net

Ad absurdum per aspera - 23 Jun 2005 00:56 GMT
> Rhodes's "The Making of the Atomic Bomb" and Krass et al's "Uranium
> Enrichment and Nuclear Weapon Proliferation" agree that it's "calutron",
> from University of California (Lawrence's home base and the site of its
> invention).  The name seems to have been fairly arbitrary, and I speculate
> that it was chosen for wartime secrecy:  a short, convenient name that
> didn't advertise just what the thing was.

I'm not sure whether the name "calutron" was intended, as so much
terminology of course was, for wartime secrecy.  Heilbron and Seidel,
in their scholarly history _Lawrence and his Laboratory_ (p. 515 et
seq.) don't mention that, describing the name merely as honoring the
University of California.  In those days "-tron" was a widely used part
of the names of high-tech widgets (examples include magnetron,
thyratron, and of course Lawrence's invention, which he had named --
the cyclotron).

Heilbron and Seidel point out that the MAUD committee, the National
Defense Research Council's uranium committee, and at least the first
two out of three National Academy of Science panels on the subject
didn't seem to recognize electromagnetic separation as potentially much
more than a research tool.  (For corroboration and other perspectives
on isotope separation, see _The Making of the Atomic Bomb_, as well as
http://www.osti.gov/accomplishments/pdf/DE99001330/DE99001330.pdf,
especially document pages 5 and 8 aka PDF pages 15 and 18.)  Lawrence
seems to have been its main prominent enthusiast in the early going,
and he possessed (personally or with his "cyclotroneers" both the
preeminent expertise in that sort of thing and the credibility to
convince others.

The calutron was an offshoot of the technology of the cyclotron, though
more accurately thought of as a mass spectrometer.  (Heilbron and
Seidel go a bit into a competing approach to electromagnetic
separation, the "isotron," which was proposed by Robert Wilson -- later
of Fermilab fame but then an uneasy member of Lawrence's lab  -- but
was not pursued.)  After a  proof of principle, a big calutron
prototype was built, co-opting  a  brand-new central magnet that had
been intended for a 184-inch "he-man cyclotron" on an unused hillside
near the Berkeley campus.   The racetracks for production-scale
separation were at Oak Ridge, which was also home to the competing
technology, gaseous diffusion -- both on an epic scale.

The darkest periods of this history -- especially circa 1944 --
indicate the wisdom of pursuing two very different uranium isotope
separation schemes in parallel, and of additionally pursuing the
plutonium approach.  At times, people must have despaired that either
one would yield enough U-235 for a weapon.  Ultimately, after a great
deal of both the inspiration and the perspiration sides of
inventiveness, both were made to work.

Postwar, the big magnet at Berkeley went back to its original purpose
of civilian science.  As the core of a much different machine based on
a newly discovered principle called phase stability, it became the
184-Inch Synchrocyclotron, played a big role in particle physics in its
day, and in various forms and roles was operated until the mid-80s.  As
you can see from some of the pictures, the magnet yoke in question is a
massive thing -- it also served as the central support for a polar
crane, and is still in place at an otherwise quite different
accelerator facility called the Advanced Light Source:
http://www-als.lbl.gov/als/aboutals/flyoverSound.MOV
But I digress.

For a quick online survey of those days, see for instance
http://www.lbl.gov/Science-Articles/Research-Review/Magazine/1981/81fchp3.html

That issue of the magazine gave an early glimpse of what would become
_Lawrence And His Laboratory_.   Volume 1 (ISBN:  0520064267) came out
in 1990 and takes the story  to the verge of the war years; alas, I
don't know the status of the intended subsequent volumes.

Cheers,
--Joe
Henry Spencer - 24 Jun 2005 02:09 GMT
>I'm not sure whether the name "calutron" was intended, as so much
>terminology of course was, for wartime secrecy.  Heilbron and Seidel,
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
>thyratron, and of course Lawrence's invention, which he had named --
>the cyclotron).

Yes, but those names were at least vaguely descriptive (with the exception
of "thyratron", which began as a trademark and hence *couldn't* be too
descriptive).  "Calutron" says nothing at all about what it is or how it
works, which makes me suspicious; Lawrence's other gadgets all had more
descriptive content in their names.

If this was simply his private decision, you wouldn't necessarily find
discussion of it in a history.  Quite possibly nobody ever thought to ask
him about it, after the war when such things could be discussed freely.

> more accurately thought of as a mass spectrometer.  (Heilbron and
>Seidel go a bit into a competing approach to electromagnetic
>separation, the "isotron," which was proposed by Robert Wilson...

Hmm, any indication of how it worked?

>The darkest periods of this history -- especially circa 1944 --
>indicate the wisdom of pursuing two very different uranium isotope
>separation schemes in parallel...

Three, if you count thermal diffusion (which didn't turn out well as an
end-to-end production technique but was very valuable as preprocessing for
the calutrons).
Signature

"Think outside the box -- the box isn't our friend."    |   Henry Spencer
                               -- George Herbert       | henry@spsystems.net

Dave Michelson - 24 Jun 2005 06:03 GMT
>> more accurately thought of as a mass spectrometer.  (Heilbron and
>> Seidel go a bit into a competing approach to electromagnetic
>> separation, the "isotron," which was proposed by Robert Wilson...
>
> Hmm, any indication of how it worked?

Some simply describe the isotron as using electric rather than magnetic
fields to effect separation but it's a bit more complicated than that.

If you're familiar with klystrons and the concept of velocity
modulation, the method used will be instantly familiar.  The isotron
accelerates an ion stream using a strong constant electric field.  This
separates components with different masses.  A weaker, sawtoothed
electric field causes longitudinal bunching.  Periodic application of
electrostatic deflection allows U-235 bunches to pass while U-238
bunches are deflected.  The major advantage is potentially higher
currents (and production rates) than the caltron.

>> The darkest periods of this history -- especially circa 1944 --
>> indicate the wisdom of pursuing two very different uranium isotope
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
> an end-to-end production technique but was very valuable as
> preprocessing for the calutrons).

Nope. Four techniques were actively pursued: calutron, isotron, ionic
centrifuge, and, of course, thermal diffusion. ICH?

BTW, a check of the Smythe report confirms that "calutron" is a
contraction of "California University cyclotron".  The name, isotron, on
the other hand is described as "purposely meaningless".

(I always knew that a Master's degree in accelerator physics would prove
useful some day.)

--
Dave Michelson
davem@ece.ubc.ca
Derek Lyons - 24 Jun 2005 19:34 GMT
>> Three, if you count thermal diffusion (which didn't turn out well as
>> an end-to-end production technique but was very valuable as
>> preprocessing for the calutrons).
>
>Nope. Four techniques were actively pursued: calutron, isotron, ionic
>centrifuge, and, of course, thermal diffusion. ICH?

Nope, no T-shirt.  Student of nuclear weapons history generally only
count as 'actively pursued' the methods that got at least as far as
pilot plants and actively contributed material to the processing
stream - calutron, thermal diffusion, gaseous diffusion.

>(I always knew that a Master's degree in accelerator physics would prove
>useful some day.)

One suspects that a degree in that area could lead to emphasis
different from what students and experts in a very different area
assign.

D.
Signature

Touch-twice life. Eat. Drink. Laugh.

-Resolved: To be more temperate in my postings.
Oct 5th, 2004 JDL

Dave Michelson - 25 Jun 2005 05:14 GMT
> Nope, no T-shirt.  Student of nuclear weapons history generally only
> count as 'actively pursued' the methods that got at least as far as
> pilot plants and actively contributed material to the processing
> stream - calutron, thermal diffusion, gaseous diffusion.

Researchers generally equate "actively pursued" with "actively
developed", i.e., budget, personnel, resources assigned.  As distinct
from merely "proposed".  But not necessarily "deployed".

> One suspects that a degree in that area could lead to emphasis
> different from what students and experts in a very different area
> assign.

Or, as Robert Wilson famously noted, accelerator physics has relatively
little to do with national defence.

Signature

Dave Michelson
davem@ece.ubc.ca

Dave Michelson - 06 Jun 2005 05:24 GMT
>>Oak Ridge calutron
>
> ..."Calutron" or "Calliotron", Henry? I've seen this spelled both ways
> in reference to this, and I'm curious which is correct.

Calutron is the only spelling that I've ever seen.

Signature

Dave Michelson
davem@ece.ubc.ca

Dave Michelson - 06 Jun 2005 05:29 GMT
>  
> Calutron is the only spelling that I've ever seen.

IIRC, calutron is a contraction of CALifornia University cycloTRON.

Signature

Dave Michelson
davem@ece.ubc.ca

Reunite Gondwanaland (Mary Shafer) - 13 Jun 2005 15:06 GMT
> The closet thing to isotope bombardment would have been the British
> anthrax experiments during the war; that also would have led to areas
> with a long-lived contamination problem.

Not "would have led", just "led".  They did contaminate a 520-acre
island, Gruinard Island, in 1942, testing bombs with anthrax.  It was
decontaminated in 1986, at a cost of half a million pounds.  It took
280 tons of formaldehyde, mixed with 2000 tons of sea water.  Needless
to say, this didn't exactly improve the fertility of the soil.

The British weren't the only ones to experiment; the Soviets
contaminated Vozrozhdeniye Island with anthrax, plague, tularemia,
Marburg, smallpox, and other nasty diseases.

Mary

Signature

Mary Shafer   Retired aerospace research engineer
We didn't just do weird stuff at Dryden, we wrote reports about it.
reunite.gondwana@gmail.com or miliff@qnet.com

Pat Flannery - 13 Jun 2005 18:17 GMT
>  
>
[quoted text clipped - 13 lines]
>Marburg, smallpox, and other nasty diseases.
>  

I meant if they started dumping it on Germany. You would have made a lot
of Germany uninhabitable for several decades.
Anthrax is a great terror weapon, but as a military weapon, it sucks.
You make an area that even your own troops can't enter.

Pat
Scott Hedrick - 13 Jun 2005 21:07 GMT
> The British weren't the only ones to experiment; the Soviets
> contaminated Vozrozhdeniye Island with anthrax, plague, tularemia,
> Marburg, smallpox, and other nasty diseases.

They turned a perfectly good island into a New Jersey clone?
Pat Flannery - 14 Jun 2005 16:49 GMT
>They turned a perfectly good island into a New Jersey clone?
>  

COMRADE! In the Soviet Union nothing was "perfectly good". That would
suggest a stratification of things into different classes of "good"
which would antithetical to the classless system of Marxism. The aim of
the New And Improved Soviet Man must be to strive for a socio-economic
system in which everything is "equally mediocre" rather than "perfectly
good" or "perfectly bad".
When Marxism is perfected, visitors to the future "Soviet Union II- The
Sequel"*  will be able to look around themselves and say "This society
has no class!" and they will be perfectly...excuse me...somewhat correct
in saying so.

*This whole "Russia" thing is but a slight historical aberration on the
road to the Red Utopia, a misplaced child's toy on the stairs of
Socialist Progress which the Proletarian Masses must ascend, that emits
a little squeak when stepped upon, like a  counter-revolutionary
dissident's whining in the night from his cell in the Lubyanka.    

Patski
Jonathan Silverlight - 14 Jun 2005 17:44 GMT
>> The British weren't the only ones to experiment; the Soviets
>> contaminated Vozrozhdeniye Island with anthrax, plague, tularemia,
>> Marburg, smallpox, and other nasty diseases.
>
>They turned a perfectly good island into a New Jersey clone?

And I thought the Martians died from commonplace diseases - colds and so
on.
Terrell Miller - 14 Jun 2005 01:41 GMT
> The British weren't the only ones to experiment; the Soviets
> contaminated Vozrozhdeniye Island with anthrax, plague, tularemia,
> Marburg, smallpox, and other nasty diseases.

Ivan doesn't f.ck around, does he? If he's gonna contaminate an island
then by Marx he's gonna bloody well contaminate an island :O

Signature

Terrell Miller
millerto@bellsouth.net

"Suddenly, after nearly 30 years of scorn, Prog is cool again".
-Entertainment Weekly

Herb Schaltegger - 14 Jun 2005 02:26 GMT
>> The British weren't the only ones to experiment; the Soviets
>> contaminated Vozrozhdeniye Island with anthrax, plague, tularemia,
>> Marburg, smallpox, and other nasty diseases.
>
> Ivan doesn't f.ck around, does he? If he's gonna contaminate an island
> then by Marx he's gonna bloody well contaminate an island :O

Eh, bunch a  panty-waist commie bastards.  We NUKED an Island almost
right off the map!   More than one, in fact.  In addition to rendering
Bikini Atoll uninhabitable for decade, see, e.g., Elugelab Atoll -
Operation "Ivy" involving the "Mike" prototype thermonuclear device;
see also, "Frigate Bird" shot.  Had we wanted, we coulda blown
Christmas Island right back into coral shards. ;-)

Signature

Herb Schaltegger, GPG Key ID: BBF6FC1C
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."  - Benjamin Franklin, 1759
<http://www.individual-i.com/>

Peter Stickney - 14 Jun 2005 05:46 GMT
>>> The British weren't the only ones to experiment; the Soviets
>>> contaminated Vozrozhdeniye Island with anthrax, plague, tularemia,
[quoted text clipped - 8 lines]
> Atoll - Operation "Ivy" involving the "Mike" prototype thermonuclear
> device;

It's rather interesting - Pre Ivy Mike charts of the area show
Elugelab Island.  Post Mike charts shoe Elugelab Crater.
 
> see also, "Frigate Bird" shot.  Had we wanted, we coulda blown
> Christmas Island right back into coral shards. ;-)

We very nearly did - Well, Johnston Island, anyway.  One of the Thor
IRBMs used in Operating Dominic kinda blew up as it was lifting off
with a 1.5 - 2 MT warhead aboard.  It took years to get it all
cleaned up.  

Signature

Pete Stickney
Java Man knew nothing about coffee.

Pat Flannery - 14 Jun 2005 07:05 GMT
>We very nearly did - Well, Johnston Island, anyway.  One of the Thor
>IRBMs used in Operating Dominic kinda blew up as it was lifting off
>with a 1.5 - 2 MT warhead aboard.  It took years to get it all
>cleaned up.

There's video of that "slight launch anomaly" on the "Trinity and
Beyond- The Atomic Bomb Movie" video.
I'll bet there wasn't a dry set of pants in the launch control room
around the time the flames started licking up the side of the Thor. How
would you like to be the guy who had to push the warhead destruct button?
Sure, it's just supposed to blow up with no nuclear yield...in theory,
that is. :-D

Pat
Reivilo Snuved - 01 Jul 2005 16:18 GMT
> Eh, bunch a  panty-waist commie bastards.  We NUKED an Island almost
> right off the map!   More than one, in fact.  In addition to rendering
> Bikini Atoll uninhabitable for decade, see, e.g., Elugelab Atoll -
> Operation "Ivy" involving the "Mike" prototype thermonuclear device;

Minor nitpick: I think the Ivy Mike shot (and the vaporization of Elugelab)
took place on Eniwetok Atoll; Bikini Atoll got the (bigger) Castle Bravo.
Herb Schaltegger - 01 Jul 2005 16:38 GMT
>> Eh, bunch a  panty-waist commie bastards.  We NUKED an Island almost
>> right off the map!   More than one, in fact.  In addition to rendering
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
> Minor nitpick: I think the Ivy Mike shot (and the vaporization of Elugelab)
> took place on Eniwetok Atoll; Bikini Atoll got the (bigger) Castle Bravo.

I think you misread my post - I wrote "In addition to rendering Bikini
Atoll uninhabitable . . ."  I didn't mean that Bikini was rendered
uninhabitable as a result of Mike.

Ivy Mike was indeed at Elugelab (which is a part of Eniwetok), as I
wrote initially -
< http://nuclearweaponarchive.org/Usa/Tests/Ivy.html>

Signature

Herb Schaltegger, GPG Key ID: BBF6FC1C
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."  - Benjamin Franklin, 1759
<http://www.individual-i.com/>

Peter Stickney - 01 Jul 2005 20:07 GMT
>> Eh, bunch a  panty-waist commie bastards.  We NUKED an Island
>> almost
[quoted text clipped - 6 lines]
> Elugelab) took place on Eniwetok Atoll; Bikini Atoll got the
> (bigger) Castle Bravo.

Well - there's a reason why Castle Bravo took place at Bikini.
Eugelab wasn't there any more.

Castle Bravo was an interesting shot.  Scary, but interesting.
(Not including the Lucky Dragon Number 5 [1])
It was calculated to yieid 6 MT, and ended up delivering 15 MT.
I've read an account of a couple of observers in one of the medium
range blockhouses.  It's a real Twilight Zone tale.
(The shot goes off.  The ground starts shaking, and things are falling
off workbenches.  This hasn't happened before.  Just when they
realize that what they're feeling is the Ground Shock, the Air Shock
hits.  After that, there's some debate about whether opening the
doors & going out would be a Bad Idea)  

[1] Lucky Dragon #7 was a Japanese fishing boat that snuck into the
Restricted Zone around Bikini during/after the Castle Bravo shot.
Due to a shift in wind, they ended up under/inside the largest fallout
area.  They kept fishing.  On the way back to Japan, they started
showing strong signs of radiation sickness. One crewman died.  The
boat's owners sold the contaminated catch into the Japanese
commercial markets.    

Signature

Pete Stickney
Java Man knew nothing about coffee.

Pat Flannery - 14 Jun 2005 06:52 GMT
> Ivan doesn't f.ck around, does he? If he's gonna contaminate an island
> then by Marx he's gonna bloody well contaminate an island :O

Ever hear of this incident?:
http://www.anthrax.osd.mil/documents/library/Sverdlovsk.pdf
This is what happens when you get sloppy with biological weapons.

Pat
Scott Hedrick - 14 Jun 2005 16:40 GMT
> > Ivan doesn't f.ck around, does he? If he's gonna contaminate an island
> > then by Marx he's gonna bloody well contaminate an island :O
>
> Ever hear of this incident?:
> http://www.anthrax.osd.mil/documents/library/Sverdlovsk.pdf
> This is what happens when you get sloppy with biological weapons.

I vaguely recall a nuclear accident in the USSR, where they had been dumping
nuclear waste into a deep cavern- and apparently, just *dumping* it, without
containment or even sorting, and eventually enough material gathered
together to reach critical mass and go pop, thus contaminating a large swath
of land.

ISTR seeing this on NOVA, but that memory's pretty shaky.
Pat Flannery - 14 Jun 2005 17:41 GMT
>I vaguely recall a nuclear accident in the USSR, where they had been dumping
>nuclear waste into a deep cavern- and apparently, just *dumping* it, without
>containment or even sorting, and eventually enough material gathered
>together to reach critical mass and go pop, thus contaminating a large swath
>of land.
>  

That was the explosion at the Chelyabinsk-40 reactor complex near the
city of Kyshtym, they had the plutonium processing waste in some
semi-underground storage tanks that suffered a cooling system failure
which caused a chemical reaction that led to at least one of the tanks
exploding:
http://www.kose.ee/nucbasic/nucpedia/uk/accident_kysh.htm

Pat
Terrell Miller - 15 Jun 2005 03:02 GMT
>> Ivan doesn't f.ck around, does he? If he's gonna contaminate an island
>> then by Marx he's gonna bloody well contaminate an island :O
>
> Ever hear of this incident?:
> http://www.anthrax.osd.mil/documents/library/Sverdlovsk.pdf
> This is what happens when you get sloppy with biological weapons.

the Castle Anthrax?!?

Signature

Terrell Miller
millerto@bellsouth.net

"Suddenly, after nearly 30 years of scorn, Prog is cool again".
-Entertainment Weekly

Reunite Gondwanaland (Mary Shafer) - 14 Jun 2005 08:03 GMT
> > The British weren't the only ones to experiment; the Soviets
> > contaminated Vozrozhdeniye Island with anthrax, plague, tularemia,
> > Marburg, smallpox, and other nasty diseases.
>
> Ivan doesn't f.ck around, does he? If he's gonna contaminate an island
> then by Marx he's gonna bloody well contaminate an island :O

"Vozrozhdeniye" means "Rebirth", I understand.

Mary

Signature

Mary Shafer   Retired aerospace research engineer
We didn't just do weird stuff at Dryden, we wrote reports about it.
reunite.gondwana@gmail.com or miliff@qnet.com

Henry Spencer - 05 Jun 2005 19:30 GMT
>Heinlein did write "Solution Unsatisfactory" at about that time, IIRC,
>and it did involve nuclear weaponry, albeit what we nowadays call
>Radiological Warfare - dusting something down with hot stuff.

Indeed, it's been pointed out many times that Heinlein actually pulled off
a more difficult feat, predicting not the Bomb but (in a general sort of
way) the nuclear stalemate.

>Not quite the Los Alamos Special, but that is a method that has been
>bandied about as a possible German fallback strategy when they
>discovered that they didn't have the resources to build a bomb...

Indeed, (a) some of the first troops on the D-Day beaches reportedly
carried geiger counters, and (b) the Allies were deeply relieved when the
warhead on the V-2 turned out to be ordinary high explosive.
Signature

"Think outside the box -- the box isn't our friend."    |   Henry Spencer
                               -- George Herbert       | henry@spsystems.net

Pat Flannery - 05 Jun 2005 21:25 GMT
>Indeed, (a) some of the first troops on the D-Day beaches reportedly
>carried geiger counters, and (b) the Allies were deeply relieved when the
>warhead on the V-2 turned out to be ordinary high explosive.
>  

The British checked out the first V-1 "Buzz Bomb"  impact site with a
geiger counter. Is that what you are referring to?
I don't know if they were concerned about V-2s carrying isotopic
warheads as such.
The Germans did have a different nose warhead section for the V-1 called
the "Baureihe D-1" specifically designed to carry chemical weapons, but
never deployed it.

Pat
Henry Spencer - 06 Jun 2005 00:00 GMT
>>...the Allies were deeply relieved when the
>>warhead on the V-2 turned out to be ordinary high explosive.
>
>The British checked out the first V-1 "Buzz Bomb"  impact site with a
>geiger counter. Is that what you are referring to?

My recollection -- with the caveat that it's been a long time since I read
about this -- is that the concern re-surfaced with each new weapon type.
Signature

"Think outside the box -- the box isn't our friend."    |   Henry Spencer
                               -- George Herbert       | henry@spsystems.net

OM - 06 Jun 2005 01:48 GMT
>I don't know if they were concerned about V-2s carrying isotopic
>warheads as such.

...Indeed. From what we were told back in NROTC *and* our American
history class, the big concern was that the Nazis would put either a
biological or a chemical weapon in the cone and let the air do the
rest after impact. Radiological "dirty" bombs weren't even really
considered a possibility, although the geiger counter reports - yes,
they did inspect the first few impact sites with these - were
apparently an attempt to see if any of the guidance systems were using
some sort of mild radioactive component that the Allies hadn't
considered.

                OM

Signature

"No bastard ever won a war by dying for     | http://www.io.com/~o_m
his country. He won it by making the other | Sergeant-At-Arms
poor dumb bastard die for his country."    | Human O-Ring Society

    - General George S. Patton, Jr

Pat Flannery - 06 Jun 2005 05:07 GMT
>...Indeed. From what we were told back in NROTC *and* our American
>history class, the big concern was that the Nazis would put either a
>biological or a chemical weapon in the cone and let the air do the
>rest after impact.

In the case of the R-2, the isotopes were to be sprayed out in a liquid
form as the missile descended rather than be dispersed on impact; that
would leave it all in the crater that a V-2 would make due to its speed.
BTW, I finally found the figure that the Peenemunde boys quoted for the
V-2's CEP  to the German government when they were trying to get
funding... I hope you aren't drinking anything- their quoted CEP was
around _100_ meters from the intended impact point. IRRC actual accuracy
was an ovoid about _8 miles x 12 miles_ in size.

Pat
Peter Stickney - 06 Jun 2005 08:28 GMT
>>...Indeed. From what we were told back in NROTC *and* our American
>>history class, the big concern was that the Nazis would put either a
[quoted text clipped - 12 lines]
> around _100_ meters from the intended impact point. IRRC actual
> accuracy was an ovoid about _8 miles x 12 miles_ in size.

That's amusing.  When you consider the one case where live V-2s were
fired from known, surveyed sites at a known, surveyed target (The
Ludendorff Bridge, at Remagen in March, 1945), the CEP was more than
2,000 m (At least - the closest of the 11 missiles fired was 600m.
The furthest, which could probably be claimed as an outlier was 20 km
off.  

Signature

Pete Stickney
Java Man knew nothing about coffee.

Pat Flannery - 06 Jun 2005 06:07 GMT
>That's amusing.  When you consider the one case where live V-2s were
>fired from known, surveyed sites at a known, surveyed target (The
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
>off.  
>  

I suspect that the Peenemunde team had left a few things out of the
math- high altitude winds, the tumbling of the rocket after motor burn
out, less than perfect construction, etc., and presented the accuracy of
the perfect hypothetical missile flight given the limitations of the
guidance system and accuracy of motor cut-off via the accelerometer or
via radio.
Pat
Murray Anderson - 07 Jun 2005 01:51 GMT
> >>...Indeed. From what we were told back in NROTC *and* our American
> >>history class, the big concern was that the Nazis would put either a
[quoted text clipped - 19 lines]
> The furthest, which could probably be claimed as an outlier was 20 km
> off.

The figure usually given for the nearest point was a farm about 300 yards
from the bridge. It would  be a little farther from the centre of the
bridge, which was about 300 metres long.
The U.S. army green book (ground forces) says three rockets of the 11 went
in the river. These would almost certainly be in the 3 to 4 km long bend
where the Rhine runs almost east-west, nearly perpendicular to the launch
direction from Eelerberg. The Rhine is no more than 500 metres wide in this
region, so we get about 1/4 of the rockets in a box 500 meters by 3000-4000
meters, giving error of +/-250 meters in range and +/-1500-2000 meters in
line. The CEP would be about the larger of the two errors where they are so
different.
This suggests that the Germans were using a prototype guidance system for
the engine cutoff, maybe a doubly integrating accelerometer, together with
the Leitstrahl beam for the line guidance. The SS battalion which fired the
rockets would get the best of everything naturally.
The range was about 212 km and everything works better when you're well
inside the max range.

Murray Anderson
Peter Stickney - 06 Jun 2005 06:35 GMT
>>I don't know if they were concerned about V-2s carrying isotopic
>>warheads as such.
[quoted text clipped - 8 lines]
> using some sort of mild radioactive component that the Allies hadn't
> considered.

In order to have Bugs or Gas (or, for that matter, Radioactive Dust)
work from a ballistic missile, you've got to disperse the agent at
exactly the right height - too high, and it disperses too much, and
you lose whatever effect you wanted.  Too low, and you create an
easily quarantined and neutralized (for some values of easy) "Hot
Spot".  Missile fuzing is a tricky business.

The interesting thing about that is that when all was said and done,
the V-2's impact fuzes didn't work worth a damn, and the Germans
never could figure out a working proximity fuze.  The impact fuzes
took so long to initiate the warhead that it had completely buried
itself before it detonated - if it detonated at all. (The technical
term for that is "Camouflet")  This wasn't actually realized until we
started launching, and then inspecting the impact craters of, V-2s at
White Sands.  Some of the folks there had been on the receiving end
of wartime V-2s, and they noted that the craters produced by the
non-explosive, but ballasted warhead sections were very similar to
the live rounds.  In terms of surface effect, the Germans would have
been better off filling the warheads with bricks rather than Torpex.
That does, however, make the V-2 useless as a Chem/Bio/Radiological
delivery system.

Signature

Pete Stickney
Java Man knew nothing about coffee.

Pat Flannery - 06 Jun 2005 05:17 GMT
>The interesting thing about that is that when all was said and done,
>the V-2's impact fuzes didn't work worth a damn, and the Germans
>never could figure out a working proximity fuze.  The impact fuzes
>took so long to initiate the warhead that it had completely buried
>itself before it detonated - if it detonated at all.
>  

WvB stated that Hitler had pointed out this potential problem to the
Peenemunde team- and to his surprise, Hitler was completely correct.
The fact that it dug a hole on impact ("Rods From Gott", anyone?) did
have one interesting side effect- the impact and detonation caused a
seismic effect like Barnes Wallis' "Earthquake Bombs" and ruptured
underground gas and water mains, which started fires while
simultaneously impairing the ability to extinguish them.

Pat
Murray Anderson - 07 Jun 2005 01:23 GMT
> >>I don't know if they were concerned about V-2s carrying isotopic
> >>warheads as such.
[quoted text clipped - 30 lines]
> That does, however, make the V-2 useless as a Chem/Bio/Radiological
> delivery system.

The V2 impact fuse was insensitive to keep it from exploding during
re-entry. Actually the fuses worked fine. The impact speed added the
equivalent of a couple hundred kilos of TNT to the 750 kilos explosive in
the warhead. The impact crater might not look that much different but the
ground shock would take down buildings a lot farther away.

Murray Anderson
Pat Flannery - 07 Jun 2005 02:14 GMT
>The V2 impact fuse was insensitive to keep it from exploding during
>re-entry.
>
>  

That was also why Amatol (a mixture of TNT and Ammonium Nitrate) was
used as the warhead filling; the warhead was in the very nose of the
rocket, and due to reentry heating a fairly insensitive and low powered
high explosive was used.

Pat
 
Sign In
Join
My Latest Posts
My Monitored Threads
My Blog
My Photo Gallery
My Profile
My Homepage

Start New Thread
Enable EMail Alerts
Rate this Thread



©2012 Advenet LLC   Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.