"John Mullen" wrote in message
...
Kevin Brooks wrote:

"Chad Irby" wrote in message
m...

In article ,
"Kevin Brooks" wrote:


Having actually seen a SADM (minus a real core, of course), I can tell

you

it is not a "suitcase" device, unless you haul around one hell of a
suitcase. It is closer in size to a garbage can (like the large kitchen
variety). It pressed the ability of being a manportable device (the guy
lugging it on his back could not carry much else in the way of mission
equipment). As the Nuclear Weapons Archive describes it: "It was a

cylinder

40 cm by 60 cm, and weighed 68 kg (the actual warhead portion weighed

only

27 kg). Although the Mk-54 SADM has itself been called a "suitcase
bomb"

it

is more like a "steamer trunk" bomb, especially considering its
weight."

But there is a rather scary little piece about suitcase nukes at the
Nuclear Weapons Archive, which says about suitcase nukes:

"We can now try to estimated the absolute minimum possible mass for a
bomb with a significant yield. Since the critical mass for alpha-phase
plutonium is 10.5 kg, and an additional 20-30% of mass is needed to make
a significant explosion, this implies 13 kg or so. A thin beryllium
reflector can reduce this by a couple of kilograms, but the necessary
high explosive, packaging, triggering system, etc. will add mass, so the
true absolute minimum probably lies in the range of 11-15 kg (and is
probably closer to 15 than 11)."

http://nuclearweaponarchive.org/News/DoSuitcaseNukesExist.html


He is talking apparently about the nuclear material in the core only
being
somewhere around 11-13 kg (it is going to take more than 2 to 4
kilograms of
HE, Be, triggers, etc to handle the rest of the equation); in that same
article he refers to the W-54 as being the smallest practical sherical
device ever fielded, and then also describes the linear implosion
devices
(which are narrower, but also longer) used in arty rounds. None of the
fielded weapons ever got below around 100 pounds or so.

That isn't how I understood it.

Here was his description of the SADM:
"The W-54 nuclear package is certainly light enough by itself to be used in
a "suitcase bomb" but the closest equivalent to such a device that US has
ever deployed was a man-carried version called the Mk-54 SADM (Small Atomic
Demolition Munition). This used a version of the W-54, but the whole package
was much larger and heavier. It was a cylinder 40 cm by 60 cm, and weighed
68 kg (the actual warhead portion weighed only 27 kg). Although the Mk-54
SADM has itself been called a "suitcase bomb" it is more like a "steamer
trunk" bomb, especially considering its weight."



'This is probably a fair description of the W-54 Davy Crockett warhead.
This warhead was the lightest ever deployed by the US, with a minimum
mass of about 23 kg (it also came in heavier packages)'

That is already over 50 pounds with no protective covering for the internals
(I doubt you'd want to have all of those initiators, wires, etc., not to
mention the HE layer itself, exposed). Sorry, but the evidence for a
"suitcase bomb" just is not very convincing at this point.

Brooks


John