Operational Nukes are Way More Powerful than on this clip.
IINM and IIRC:
All but a few of the detonations on that clip were single stage weapons - i.e., fission weapons like the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombs -- called "Atomic bombs" or A-bombs. (TNT is used to start a chain reaction which splits isotopes of Uranium - U 238, I think, which then continues on its own.)
The "heat" from the fission reaction of an A-bomb is used to "detonate" the fusion reaction of a Hydrogen bomb ("H-bomb"), which is why they are referred to as multi-stage weapons. So, an A-bomb, which was most of the explosions you saw on the clip, is the detonator for an H-bomb.
BUT: all these are just single detonation tests, to study and develop the weapon. The wartime plan for these weapons is much more fearsome.
We used to think that if the USSR were to launch a massive strike, it would assign multiple weapons to all high-value targets. Take Los Angeles, for example: they would drop 4 or 5 multi-stage weapons on L.A., and 3 or 4 more in the Valley. But the number of weapons isn't the most important factor influencing effectiveness of a given strike. It's how they are used.
The detonations are air-bursts that occur at specific intervals so that the shock waves bounce (reflect) off the surrounding mountains, and then coalesce to form an exponentially more powerful shock wave that then strikes the surface and propagates outward - only to be reinforced by subsequent airbursts in the seconds that follow.
And the initial destruction, ironically, isn't the worst part (unless you happen to be there at the time). It's the radioactive fallout. But the folks with their fingers on the buttons knew (though they denied it) that any widespread exchange of nuclear fire would result in nuclear winter - so nuclear war was (and is) a lose - lose proposition.
But a single device is still a hell of a terrorist weapon.
Pretty crazy stuff, huh?
BTW, we haven't done any above ground testing since like the early '60s, and I think the last above ground nuclear test anywhere was like in 1980.
IINM and IIRC:
All but a few of the detonations on that clip were single stage weapons - i.e., fission weapons like the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombs -- called "Atomic bombs" or A-bombs. (TNT is used to start a chain reaction which splits isotopes of Uranium - U 238, I think, which then continues on its own.)
The "heat" from the fission reaction of an A-bomb is used to "detonate" the fusion reaction of a Hydrogen bomb ("H-bomb"), which is why they are referred to as multi-stage weapons. So, an A-bomb, which was most of the explosions you saw on the clip, is the detonator for an H-bomb.
BUT: all these are just single detonation tests, to study and develop the weapon. The wartime plan for these weapons is much more fearsome.
We used to think that if the USSR were to launch a massive strike, it would assign multiple weapons to all high-value targets. Take Los Angeles, for example: they would drop 4 or 5 multi-stage weapons on L.A., and 3 or 4 more in the Valley. But the number of weapons isn't the most important factor influencing effectiveness of a given strike. It's how they are used.
The detonations are air-bursts that occur at specific intervals so that the shock waves bounce (reflect) off the surrounding mountains, and then coalesce to form an exponentially more powerful shock wave that then strikes the surface and propagates outward - only to be reinforced by subsequent airbursts in the seconds that follow.
And the initial destruction, ironically, isn't the worst part (unless you happen to be there at the time). It's the radioactive fallout. But the folks with their fingers on the buttons knew (though they denied it) that any widespread exchange of nuclear fire would result in nuclear winter - so nuclear war was (and is) a lose - lose proposition.
But a single device is still a hell of a terrorist weapon.
Pretty crazy stuff, huh?
BTW, we haven't done any above ground testing since like the early '60s, and I think the last above ground nuclear test anywhere was like in 1980.
