Czechoslovak nuclear weapons? Warszaw Pact War Plans ( The Effects of a Global Thermonuclear War ...)

(szia1975) wrote:
"D. Patterson" wrote in
message ...
"jahodova zmrzlina" wrote
in message
om...
snippage
.......


In the first massive nuclear strike by
the troops of the
Missile Forces of the Czechoslovak Front,
the front aviation
and long-range aviation added to the front
must destroy the
main group of troops of the first operations
echelon of the
7th US Army, its means of nuclear attack,
and the centers of
command and control of the aviation.

Snip
Yeah right, Nikita would give Tonda Novotny
& his boys 131 nuclear
fireckackers to play with.

This "plan" is so obvious bull**** - i wonder
whether 131 or more
bottles of rum were used during its drafting
?

More likely it was vodka.

No, Nikita was not giving Novotny and company
any nuclear warheads to play
with. Nonetheless, the nuclear warheads were
a reality, but always under
Soviet control. Nikita and company planned
to use Czechoslovak troops
trained and equipped with Soviet supplied
nuclear-capable surface-to-surface
missiles and nuclear-capable aircraft armed
with Soviet nuclear warheads
under exclusive Soviet command and control.

The armed forces of Czechoslovakia were equipped
with nuclear-capable
surface-to-surface missiles and nuclear capable
aircraft, and selected units
were trained to use nuclear weapons in combat.
However, the Soviets retained
of all nuclear warheads in peacetime, and
the Soviet forces were to assume
all command and control of "Warsaw Pact Joint
Nuclear Forces" in wartime. In
other words, selected units of Czechoslovakia's
armed forces were equipped
and trained to employ nuclear weapons, but
they could operate only with
Soviet supplied nuclear warheads under Soviet
command and control during
wartime. As usual, all such Warsaw Pact Joint
Nuclear Force activities and
nuclear weapons simulations were watched closely
during peacetime by the
typical Soviet officers serving with the Czechoslovak
forces and other
Warsaw Pact forces. Eventually, Soviet nuclear
warheads were stored in
special depots at Bela pod Bezdezem, Bilina,
and Misov. Much later, the
Soviets hid SS-23 missiles in Czechoslovakia
to evade nuclear weapons
control inspections in violation of the arms
control treaties which required
their destruction.

didn't Flight International run an article a
few years ago (2000 ?
sometime ?) about the Poles and their nuclear
capable Sukhois ? As I
recall, there was also so mention in passing
of the Pole's own nuclear
ambitions.
I have that Air International issue: it points out that the Polish scientist
who was in charge of their nascent nuclear program met with an "unfortunate
auto accident" sometime in 1978. Seems the KGB got to him before the program
could bear any (radiocactive) fruit....And the question probably was: "Who
would the Poles aim the weapons at, NATO, or the Soviet Union?"

Posted via www.My-Newsgroups.com - web to news gateway for usenet access!

On 12 Jan 2004 09:01:28 -0800, (Alexander Malinowski) wrote:

Gregory Baker wrote in message nk.net...
marcus wrote:



didn't Flight International run an article a few years ago (2000 ?
sometime ?) about the Poles and their nuclear capable Sukhois ? As I
recall, there was also so mention in passing of the Pole's own nuclear
ambitions.

Israel has 400 nuclear weapons, why cannot Poles also have some ?
They, after all, are heroically dying in Bush's service to liberate
Iraqis from their oil, so they cannot be a rogue or terrorist state!

The Poles can build them... I think the reason they don't is because
Poland signed a non-proliferation treaty. I am proud to have Poland as
a friendly country. March on, Dombrowski!


Recently there were a news, that in 70-ties Poland's leader Edward
Gierek spent a lot of money for researches of the micro thermonuclear
bomb. On the way, Poles have invented blue laser and tried to use it
to blast deuter+lithium mixture, obviously without success. Not sure
if it were serious info. Possesing microthermonuclear bomb would give
Poland immediate independence from Soviet Union.

You obviously have no idea how a nuclear device works

Al Minyard

Your French friends have many ones Mr.Minyard.
Launched from planes,SSBNs,carriers....
Tactical ones,strategical powerful ones...
And if they are as idiot as you always say,if what they do is
always ****,like you tell us post after post,
why couldn't the poles have their ones?
Do you consider they are even more stupid and weak than the French?
(No,you don't,of course.They helped Bush...)


;-ppppp



"Alan Minyard" a écrit dans le message de news:
...
On 12 Jan 2004 09:01:28 -0800, (Alexander Malinowski)
wrote:

Gregory Baker wrote in message
nk.net...
marcus wrote:



didn't Flight International run an article a few years ago (2000 ?
sometime ?) about the Poles and their nuclear capable Sukhois ? As
I
recall, there was also so mention in passing of the Pole's own
nuclear
ambitions.

Israel has 400 nuclear weapons, why cannot Poles also have some ?
They, after all, are heroically dying in Bush's service to liberate
Iraqis from their oil, so they cannot be a rogue or terrorist state!

The Poles can build them... I think the reason they don't is because
Poland signed a non-proliferation treaty. I am proud to have Poland as
a friendly country. March on, Dombrowski!


Recently there were a news, that in 70-ties Poland's leader Edward
Gierek spent a lot of money for researches of the micro thermonuclear
bomb. On the way, Poles have invented blue laser and tried to use it
to blast deuter+lithium mixture, obviously without success. Not sure
if it were serious info. Possesing microthermonuclear bomb would give
Poland immediate independence from Soviet Union.

You obviously have no idea how a nuclear device works

Al Minyard

On Thu, 15 Jan 2004 11:42:19 +0100, "Mike" wrote:

Your French friends have many ones Mr.Minyard.
Launched from planes,SSBNs,carriers....
Tactical ones,strategical powerful ones...
And if they are as idiot as you always say,if what they do is
always ****,like you tell us post after post,
why couldn't the poles have their ones?
Do you consider they are even more stupid and weak than the French?
(No,you don't,of course.They helped Bush...)


;-ppppp


What I am saying is that the "suitcase" nuclear device does not exist.
No one, not the French, not the Poles, not the UK and not the US, has them.
The "micro thermonuclear bomb is a myth, and not a very good one.

Al Minyard

From: Alan Minyard
Date: 1/15/2004 12:34 PM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

On Thu, 15 Jan 2004 11:42:19 +0100, "Mike" wrote:

Your French friends have many ones Mr.Minyard.
Launched from planes,SSBNs,carriers....
Tactical ones,strategical powerful ones...
And if they are as idiot as you always say,if what they do is
always ****,like you tell us post after post,
why couldn't the poles have their ones?
Do you consider they are even more stupid and weak than the French?
(No,you don't,of course.They helped Bush...)


;-ppppp


What I am saying is that the "suitcase" nuclear device does not exist.
No one, not the French, not the Poles, not the UK and not the US, has them.
The "micro thermonuclear bomb is a myth, and not a very good one.

Al Minyard

The U.S. Army's Green Light program and the U.S. Air Forces Davey Crockett come
pretty close.

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

"Alan Minyard" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 15 Jan 2004 11:42:19 +0100, "Mike" wrote:


What I am saying is that the "suitcase" nuclear device does not exist.
No one, not the French, not the Poles, not the UK and not the US, has
them.
The "micro thermonuclear bomb is a myth, and not a very good one.

However the 'micro fission device' is very real. The USA produced the
Special Atomic Demolition Munition (SADM) that would fit in a large
duffle bag and 80-100 lbs and the soviets had a similar device

Clips of teams exercising with SADM can be seen at

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontl...ssia/suitcase/

Alexander Lebed, ex Soviet General reported that a
significant number of Soviet nuclear demolition charges
were unaccounted for IRC.

Keith

"Keith Willshaw" wrote in message
...

"Alan Minyard" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 15 Jan 2004 11:42:19 +0100, "Mike" wrote:


What I am saying is that the "suitcase" nuclear device does not exist.
No one, not the French, not the Poles, not the UK and not the US, has
them.
The "micro thermonuclear bomb is a myth, and not a very good one.

However the 'micro fission device' is very real. The USA produced the
Special Atomic Demolition Munition (SADM) that would fit in a large
duffle bag and 80-100 lbs and the soviets had a similar device

Clips of teams exercising with SADM can be seen at

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."


http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontl...ssia/suitcase/

Alexander Lebed, ex Soviet General reported that a
significant number of Soviet nuclear demolition charges
were unaccounted for IRC.

Lebed's rants have been amply discounted. "Gen. Lebed has told a variety of
stories; first, that 100 were perhaps missing. Later, he said that perhaps
none were missing. Later, he seemed to be confused about the difference
between atomic demolition munitions and artillery shells. And now he claims
that perhaps, even if they're missing, they don't pose a threat."
(www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/military/ jan-june98/nukes_3-19.html ) The "Sixty
Minutes" TV report that broke his story was later revealed to have been
produced by a lady who, with her husband, had a book being published about
the alleged threat of small nukes and who was involved in the production of
a movie with a similar plotline. The Nuclear Weapons Archive has an
interesting treatment of the Lebed claims that casts further doubt as to the
specific veracity of his claims. Lastly, if they *had* developed weapons
that small, and if they *were* unaccounted for, we'd likely have seen their
use somewhere in the world by now, or at least heard more substantive
information since then.

Brooks

Keith

It was just a joke,mister...

For the rest,you are right
(SOS,why did I i just say???!!!)

"Alan Minyard" a écrit dans le message de news:
...
On Thu, 15 Jan 2004 11:42:19 +0100, "Mike" wrote:

Your French friends have many ones Mr.Minyard.
Launched from planes,SSBNs,carriers....
Tactical ones,strategical powerful ones...
And if they are as idiot as you always say,if what they do is
always ****,like you tell us post after post,
why couldn't the poles have their ones?
Do you consider they are even more stupid and weak than the French?
(No,you don't,of course.They helped Bush...)


;-ppppp


What I am saying is that the "suitcase" nuclear device does not exist.
No one, not the French, not the Poles, not the UK and not the US, has
them.
The "micro thermonuclear bomb is a myth, and not a very good one.

Al Minyard

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

--
cirby at cfl.rr.com

Remember: Objects in rearview mirror may be hallucinations.
Slam on brakes accordingly.

"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.

Brooks


--
cirby at cfl.rr.com

Remember: Objects in rearview mirror may be hallucinations.
Slam on brakes accordingly.