Science > Physics > First and Last time an atomic artillery shell was fired ......... 1953 Film Footage
| Topic: |
Science > Physics |
| User: |
"Hansi" |
| Date: |
11 Apr 2006 02:22:08 PM |
| Object: |
First and Last time an atomic artillery shell was fired ......... 1953 Film Footage |
Test Code-Name: GRABLE
The firing of GRABLE from a 280 mm cannon, marked the first time an
atomic artillery shell was fired and detonated. This was the only time
a nuclear artillery shell was ever fired. The Secretary of Defense, the
Secretary of the Army, and the Army Chief of Staff, along with 96
Congressional observers, viewed the detonation from an area 11
kilometers west of ground zero.XX-12 GRABLE was fired on May 25, 1953
http://www.jumpingpixels.com/nuclearartillery.html
.
|
|
| User: "Amid" |
|
| Title: Re: First and Last time an atomic artillery shell was fired ......... 1953 Film Footage |
11 Apr 2006 09:35:05 PM |
|
|
"Hansi" <fufko@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:1144783328.386237.5060@z34g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
Test Code-Name: GRABLE
The firing of GRABLE from a 280 mm cannon, marked the first time an
atomic artillery shell was fired and detonated. This was the only time
a nuclear artillery shell was ever fired. The Secretary of Defense, the
Secretary of the Army, and the Army Chief of Staff, along with 96
Congressional observers, viewed the detonation from an area 11
kilometers west of ground zero.XX-12 GRABLE was fired on May 25, 1953
http://www.jumpingpixels.com/nuclearartillery.html
they all got a good dose of Gamma rays doing that.
My neighbor was a soldier that walked into one of those 1950's atomic
experiments back then, he died of leukemia about 20 years ago.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Edward Green" |
|
| Title: Re: First and Last time an atomic artillery shell was fired ......... 1953 Film Footage |
11 Apr 2006 10:51:13 PM |
|
|
Amid wrote:
"Hansi" <fufko@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:1144783328.386237.5060@z34g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
Test Code-Name: GRABLE
The firing of GRABLE from a 280 mm cannon, marked the first time an
atomic artillery shell was fired and detonated. This was the only time
a nuclear artillery shell was ever fired. The Secretary of Defense, the
Secretary of the Army, and the Army Chief of Staff, along with 96
Congressional observers, viewed the detonation from an area 11
kilometers west of ground zero.XX-12 GRABLE was fired on May 25, 1953
http://www.jumpingpixels.com/nuclearartillery.html
they all got a good dose of Gamma rays doing that.
My neighbor was a soldier that walked into one of those 1950's atomic
experiments back then, he died of leukemia about 20 years ago.
One thing I wonder about from those films is the way target objects,
like the bus we see here, seem to ignite, and that the smoke is pushed
back away from the explosion center, well _before_ what looks like the
shock wave arrives, and whallops the crap out of them. It that damn
radiation pressure!?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Eric Gisse" |
|
| Title: Re: First and Last time an atomic artillery shell was fired ......... 1953 Film Footage |
12 Apr 2006 01:52:24 AM |
|
|
Edward Green wrote:
Amid wrote:
"Hansi" <fufko@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:1144783328.386237.5060@z34g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
Test Code-Name: GRABLE
The firing of GRABLE from a 280 mm cannon, marked the first time an
atomic artillery shell was fired and detonated. This was the only time
a nuclear artillery shell was ever fired. The Secretary of Defense, the
Secretary of the Army, and the Army Chief of Staff, along with 96
Congressional observers, viewed the detonation from an area 11
kilometers west of ground zero.XX-12 GRABLE was fired on May 25, 1953
http://www.jumpingpixels.com/nuclearartillery.html
they all got a good dose of Gamma rays doing that.
My neighbor was a soldier that walked into one of those 1950's atomic
experiments back then, he died of leukemia about 20 years ago.
One thing I wonder about from those films is the way target objects,
like the bus we see here, seem to ignite, and that the smoke is pushed
back away from the explosion center, well _before_ what looks like the
shock wave arrives, and whallops the crap out of them. It that damn
radiation pressure!?
About that section of the video....I believe everything after the
artillery shot was seperate from the artillery shell test. I have [and
have seen] both segments of footage before, and I'm certain they are
unrelated.
Of all the zany ideas created between 1950 and 1970, I'm surprised
nobody put a little more thought into nuclear artillery. Makes a hell
of a lot more sense than the nuclear mortar, for example....or an
unshielded reactor being used to power aircraft or missles for
atomspheric flight.
I'm still dissapointed Orion didn't get off the ground.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Amid" |
|
| Title: Re: First and Last time an atomic artillery shell was fired ......... 1953 Film Footage |
12 Apr 2006 11:34:59 AM |
|
|
"Eric Gisse" <jowr.pi@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1144824744.858610.207820@i40g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
Edward Green wrote:
Amid wrote:
"Hansi" <fufko@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:1144783328.386237.5060@z34g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
Test Code-Name: GRABLE
The firing of GRABLE from a 280 mm cannon, marked the first time an
atomic artillery shell was fired and detonated. This was the only
time
a nuclear artillery shell was ever fired. The Secretary of Defense,
the
Secretary of the Army, and the Army Chief of Staff, along with 96
Congressional observers, viewed the detonation from an area 11
kilometers west of ground zero.XX-12 GRABLE was fired on May 25, 1953
http://www.jumpingpixels.com/nuclearartillery.html
they all got a good dose of Gamma rays doing that.
My neighbor was a soldier that walked into one of those 1950's atomic
experiments back then, he died of leukemia about 20 years ago.
One thing I wonder about from those films is the way target objects,
like the bus we see here, seem to ignite, and that the smoke is pushed
back away from the explosion center, well _before_ what looks like the
shock wave arrives, and whallops the crap out of them. It that damn
radiation pressure!?
About that section of the video....I believe everything after the
artillery shot was seperate from the artillery shell test. I have [and
have seen] both segments of footage before, and I'm certain they are
unrelated.
I got that impression too. The objects went with other tests.
Of all the zany ideas created between 1950 and 1970, I'm surprised
nobody put a little more thought into nuclear artillery.
when the bomb goes off, it's radiation creates more gamma rays in the
atmosphere above the Gun and behind it which radiate back onto the crew,
from above and behind so to speak.
Makes a hell
of a lot more sense than the nuclear mortar, for example....or an
unshielded reactor being used to power aircraft or missles for
atomspheric flight.
I'm still dissapointed Orion didn't get off the ground.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: First and Last time an atomic artillery shell was fired ......... 1953 Film Footage |
12 Apr 2006 11:55:01 AM |
|
|
Eric Gisse <jowr.pi@gmail.com> wrote:
<snip>
Of all the zany ideas created between 1950 and 1970, I'm surprised
nobody put a little more thought into nuclear artillery. Makes a hell
of a lot more sense than the nuclear mortar, for example....or an
unshielded reactor being used to power aircraft or missles for
atomspheric flight.
I'm still dissapointed Orion didn't get off the ground.
Nuclear artillery was a dumb idea.
If you can make a nuke small enough to fire from a conventional gun,
you can make one small enough to be carried by a fighter/bomber which
moves a hell of a lot faster and can attack targets over a much wider
range than an artillery piece can.
The era of siege warfare with big artillery is history.
--
Jim Pennino
Remove .spam.sux to reply.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Edward Green" |
|
| Title: Re: First and Last time an atomic artillery shell was fired ......... 1953 Film Footage |
12 Apr 2006 04:43:36 PM |
|
|
wrote:
Nuclear artillery was a dumb idea.
If you can make a nuke small enough to fire from a conventional gun,
you can make one small enough to be carried by a fighter/bomber which
moves a hell of a lot faster and can attack targets over a much wider
range than an artillery piece can.
Then, take the pilot out of the fighter/bomber, and call it a "cruise
missile". Looks like your idea was put into practice.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Eric Gisse" |
|
| Title: Re: First and Last time an atomic artillery shell was fired ......... 1953 Film Footage |
12 Apr 2006 09:13:39 PM |
|
|
Edward Green wrote:
jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
Nuclear artillery was a dumb idea.
If you can make a nuke small enough to fire from a conventional gun,
you can make one small enough to be carried by a fighter/bomber which
moves a hell of a lot faster and can attack targets over a much wider
range than an artillery piece can.
Then, take the pilot out of the fighter/bomber, and call it a "cruise
missile". Looks like your idea was put into practice.
Funny thing. I remember reading something interesting in a book about
the SALT II treaty. One of the eventual terms was that the US could not
develop nuclear armed cruise missles because of the ease of which they
could be mounted on aircraft and thus dramatically increase the strike
range of nuclear-armed aircraft.
....and I would not be surprised if we have something akin to
Nuclear-tipped Tomahawks now. I was assuming the treaty was still in
effect, but it turns out we bowed out from it in 2002.
I'm now remembering some funny thing about how a constant stickler in
the negotiations for the treaty were some ***** tents covering silos
in either Montana or Wyoming. We eventually agreed to "never do it
again", and the Soviets had a similar "we won't do it again" agreement
with encrypting missle telemetry.
Fun read, actually. I should read it again and find out exactly where
that AFB was and mabey see if I can get a FOIA request filed and hear
exactly what the hell was under those tents.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Edward Green" |
|
| Title: Re: First and Last time an atomic artillery shell was fired ......... 1953 Film Footage |
12 Apr 2006 04:43:48 PM |
|
|
wrote:
Nuclear artillery was a dumb idea.
If you can make a nuke small enough to fire from a conventional gun,
you can make one small enough to be carried by a fighter/bomber which
moves a hell of a lot faster and can attack targets over a much wider
range than an artillery piece can.
Then, take the pilot out of the fighter/bomber, and call it a "cruise
missile". Looks like your idea was put into practice.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: First and Last time an atomic artillery shell was fired ......... 1953 Film Footage |
12 Apr 2006 02:29:13 PM |
|
|
Jim, indeed. You certainly don't need large and hard to relocated
artillery to fire a nuclear shell. The "Davy Crockett" is an example of
a tactical nuke that can be hand carried by a team of three, and fired
from a modified recoil-less rifle with IIRC, something like a
6,000-yard range.
http://www.brook.edu/FP/projects/nucwcost/davyc.HTM
Bet you thought I was joking, but I have (or at least at one time had)
a copy of the tech manual for this weapon. The Brookings photos look a
little different from the real thing, but still close enough for
"government work".
Harry C.
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: First and Last time an atomic artillery shell was fired ......... 1953 Film Footage |
12 Apr 2006 02:52:43 PM |
|
|
Ah yes, I found the manual for the Davy Crockett tripod fired nuclear
weapon. It's not a TM at all, but a FM! That suggests that the weapon
was actually fielded by the Army. Specifically, FM 23-20, "Davy
Crockett Weapons Sytem in Infantry and Armor Units", dated 1961.
The protectile itself is referred to as a "Projectile, atomic,
supercaliber, 279-mm, XM-421". I'm not sure if the XM-421 refers to
the dummy illustrated in the field manual or to the real thing. The
nuclear yield is not mentioned in the manual, and in general referse to
the warhead as "Special" not nuclear or atomic in most cases.
Interestingly enough, the FM refers to both 3 and 5 man transporting
and firing crews.
The firing instructions are quite specific, and involve getting down
into a deep foxhole and firing the weapon through use of a lanyard.
More than anything else, this historic document reveals the mentality
present during the late 1950s up through the end of the Cold War. Still
I believe that it is important for people to realize that such weapons
existed and were evidently fielded with the troop in certain areas of
combat.
Unlike most of the Army weapons manuals that I acquired by buying a few
drinks for members of my college's ROTC cadry, I purchased this one
from a surplus dealer in Rochester, NY, were many "interesting" items
were for sale. I believe that I paid all of $3 for an original issue,
along with about $100 worth of military electronics.
Harry C.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Timo Nieminen" |
|
| Title: Re: First and Last time an atomic artillery shell was fired .........1953 Film Footage |
12 Apr 2006 01:17:12 AM |
|
|
On Wed, 11 Apr 2006, Edward Green wrote:
One thing I wonder about from those films is the way target objects,
like the bus we see here, seem to ignite, and that the smoke is pushed
back away from the explosion center, well _before_ what looks like the
shock wave arrives, and whallops the crap out of them. It that damn
radiation pressure!?
Run the numbers! Force = (absorbed power + 2 * reflected power)/c.
Incident irradiance can be, say, 1 MW/m^2. A smoke particle with a
cross-section of 10 square microns would absorb about 10^-5 W, with a
resulting radiation pressure force of about 3x10^-14 N. Since the mass of
such a particle would be about 10^-14 kg, radiation pressure looks like a
plausible mechanism.
--
Timo Nieminen - Home page: http://www.physics.uq.edu.au/people/nieminen/
E-prints: http://eprint.uq.edu.au/view/person/Nieminen,_Timo_A..html
Shrine to Spirits: http://www.users.bigpond.com/timo_nieminen/spirits.html
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
