Pentagon Confirms Russia's Thermonuclear Submarine Bomb Is Real

Joined
Feb 16, 2009
Messages
25,797
Likes
26,914
Country flag
https://www.yahoo.com/news/pentagon-confirms-russias-thermonuclear-submarine-152420776.html

Pentagon Confirms Russia's Thermonuclear Submarine Bomb Is Real

The Pentagon has confirmed that a new Russian nuclear delivery drone is real. The undersea drone, which carries an enormous nuclear warhead to destroy coastal cities and military bases, was tested late last month. The test was leaked by unnamed sources to The Washington Free Beacon.

Russia calls the system "Ocean Multipurpose System 'Status-6," and it is allegedly capable of traveling underwater to distances of to 6,200 miles. It can submerge to depths of 3,280 feet and travel at speeds of up to 56 knots.

[contentlinks align="left" textonly="false" numbered="false" headline="Related%20Story" customtitles="Comparing%20Today's%20Nukes%20to%20WWII%20A-Bombs" customimages="" content="article.23306"]

The U.S. intelligence agencies estimate Status-6 will carry a multi-megaton thermonuclear bomb payload. For comparisons' sake the bomb dropped on Hiroshima was 16 kilotons, several orders of magnitude smaller. A one megaton bomb is the equivalent of 1,000 kilotons-one one million tons of TNT. Reports from Russia indicate the bomb could be as large as 100 megatons.

Status-6 is designed to attack enemy coastal cities, ports, shipyards, and naval bases. Once Status-6 arrives at its destination it detonates the bomb, causing an enormous amount of damage through blast and heat. A 100 megaton bomb would generate artificial tsunamis, carrying the destruction far inshore.


View photos
As bad as that sounds, it gets even worse. Reports from Russia indicate the bomb could be armed with a "salted bomb", or one that "salts the Earth" with the dangerous isotope Cobalt-60. Such a bomb could spread such high levels of radioactivity it would prevent anyone from using the attack zone for approximately 100 years. Depending on location and prevailing weather conditions, such an explosion would also carry vast amounts of radiation inland.

The existence of Status-6 was originally greeted with some skepticism-the weapon sounds so horrible, so devastating, and so completely over the top it is difficult to process that someone would actually want to build such a thing. Unfortunately for all of mankind, it appears that it is very real.

Russia is thought to have conceived of Status-6 as a response to America's missile defense system. Although the system is so small it cannot hope to stop a concerted Russian nuclear attack, the Russians have been looking at ways to defeat it. Status-6 skirts around the missile defense system entirely by going underwater to attack American nuclear submarine bases such as those at Kings Bay, Georgia and Kitsap, Washington. While this wouldn't stop American "boomer" missile subs already at sea, in a prolonged nuclear war it destroy submarines in port and would prevent subs at sea from going back for missile reloads.

Status-6 would be a difficult weapon to stop. Its top speed of 56 knots would be faster than the current generation of American homing torpedoes, meaning it could simply outrun its pursuers. It's alleged maximum depth would allow it to dive much deeper than American torpedoes. A faster, deeper-diving torpedo is technically possible but would have to be developed first.

According to the Free Beacon, intelligence agencies monitored a test of the drone on November 27th. The drone was accompanied by a Sarov-class weapons testing submarine. Based with Russia's Northern Fleet, Sarov submarine may act as a mothership to Status-6 in wartime.

The drone's existence was originally revealed in 2015. The release, which was thought to have been an embarrassing mistake, stated the drone would be ready by 2019, with tests to begin in 2019-2020. This "mistake" may have been intentional to fool foreign intelligence agencies into believing the program was not as far along as it really was.
 

Razor

STABLE GENIUS
Senior Member
Joined
Feb 7, 2011
Messages
7,703
Likes
9,065
Country flag
Russia calls the system "Ocean Multipurpose System 'Status-6," and it is allegedly capable of traveling underwater to distances of to 6,200 miles. It can submerge to depths of 3,280 feet and travel at speeds of up to 56 knots.
.
.
.

Reports from Russia indicate the bomb could be as large as 100 megatons.
:hmm:

These two points (underlined) make me question the article as either fear mongering on washington's part or trolling on moscow's

Submarines don't travel that fast and largest bomb ever detonated was only 50MT during the cold war, and the larger ones these days are like 5 megs.
:dude:
 

Razor

STABLE GENIUS
Senior Member
Joined
Feb 7, 2011
Messages
7,703
Likes
9,065
Country flag
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...ine-drone-us-intelligence-trump-a7467301.html


Russia tests new underwater nuclear drone amid growing tensions with the West
Unmanned submarines will reportedly be equipped with the largest nuclear weapons in existence, each capable of wiping out an area the size of England
They should make up their mind.

Earlier they said that the replacement for "Satan", the "Sarmat" which is a multimegaton nuke will wipe out an area the size of France.
And now this 100 megger (about twenty times the power of "Sarmat") will only wipe an area of the UK.

:shock:

Ref: England: about 200k sq.km. France: around 550k sq.km.

So which one is it??
 
Last edited:
Joined
Feb 16, 2009
Messages
25,797
Likes
26,914
Country flag
:hmm:

These two points (underlined) make me question the article as either fear mongering on washington's part or trolling on moscow's

Submarines don't travel that fast and largest bomb ever detonated was only 50MT during the cold war, and the larger ones these days are like 5 megs.
:dude:
what would Washington get from this type of fear mongering?? Maybe keep NATO allies in
check?? I also thought it was odd that 100 megatons can fit into a small submarine/drone type
delivery vehicle??
 
Joined
Feb 16, 2009
Messages
25,797
Likes
26,914
Country flag
They should make up their mind.

Earlier they said that the replacement for "Satan", the "Sarmat" which is a multimegaton nuke will wipe out an area the size of France.
And now this 100 megger (about twenty times the power of "Sarmat") will only wipe an area of the UK.

:shock:

Ref: England: about 200k sq.km. France: around 550k sq.km.

So which one is it??
maybe detonating it underwater would reduce the destructive power??

Disturbing thing about this bomb:

1)The size of the detonation would trigger a tsunami which would race inland .
what if the tsunami went the other way and hit not involved nations??

2) Russians may have weaponized cobalt for use in nuclear weapons???
(US also may have??) Using Cobalt would essentially pollute a wide area with radiation
 
Joined
Feb 16, 2009
Messages
25,797
Likes
26,914
Country flag
http://www.rense.com/general40/dooms.htm


The Never-Tested Doomsday Bomb

Weapons of Total Destruction

Many might remember the Neutron bomb which, when exploding, leaves buildings and roads intact while showering life on earth with lethal doses of neutron radiation. This way an enemy can kill
all life within a zone and take possession of a city and all of its content. Dreadful, is it not, but not
the Doomsday weapon conceived of in 1950 - the Cobalt Bomb.

In the light of the current talks in China with North Korea, let us reflect on the awesome power of destruction we have brought into existence.

The Cobalt Bomb is capable of wiping out life on earth. It explodes and emits long-lasting and lethal gamma radiation, the most energetic radiation in the electromagnetic spectrum. Has the Cobalt Bomb been constructed? If it has, then it is part of a classified arsenal of weapons, but who would want to
unleash a weapon of such destructive power that none who inhabit the earth would survive? Perhaps only those who can take refuge in a deep underground Ark.

From the Encarta Encyclopedia...

"The Hydrogen Bomb or H-bomb, weapon deriving a large portion of its energy from the nuclear fusion of hydrogen isotopes. In an atomic bomb , uranium or plutonium is split into lighter elements that together weigh less than the original atoms, the remainder of the mass appearing as energy. Unlike this fission bomb, the hydrogen bomb functions by the fusion, or joining together, of lighter elements into heavier elements. The end product again weighs less than its components, the difference once more appearing as energy. Because extremely high temperatures are required in order to initiate fusion reactions, the hydrogen bomb is also known as a thermonuclear bomb. The first thermonuclear bomb was exploded in 1952 at Enewetak by the United States, the second in 1953 by Russia (then the USSR). Great Britain, France, and China have also exploded thermonuclear bombs, and these five nations comprise the so-called nuclear club"nations that have the capability to produce nuclear weapons and admit to maintaining an inventory of them. The three smaller Soviet successor states that inherited nuclear arsenals (Ukraine, Kazakhstan, and Belarus) relinquished all nuclear warheads, which have been removed to Russia. Several other nations either have tested thermonuclear devices or claim to have the capability to produce them, but officially state that they do not maintain a stockpile of such weapons; among these are India, Israel, and Pakistan. South Africa's apartheid regime built six nuclear bombs but dismantled them later.

The presumable structure of a thermonuclear bomb is as follows: at its center is an atomic bomb; surrounding it is a layer of lithium deuteride (a compound of lithium and deuterium, the isotope of hydrogen with mass number 2); around it is a tamper, a thick outer layer, frequently of fissionable material, that holds the contents together in order to obtain a larger explosion. Neutrons from the atomic explosion cause the lithium to fission into helium, tritium (the isotope of hydrogen with mass number 3), and energy. The atomic explosion also supplies the temperatures needed for the subsequent fusion of deuterium with tritium, and of tritium with tritium (50,000,000 and 400,000,000, respectively). Enough neutrons are produced in the fusion reactions to produce further fission in the core and to initiate fission in the tamper.

Since the fusion reaction produces mostly neutrons and very little that is radioactive, the concept of a 'clean' bomb has resulted: one having a small atomic trigger, a less fissionable tamper, and therefore less radioactive fallout . Carrying this progression further would result in the suggested neutron bomb, which would have a minimum trigger and a nonfissionable tamper; there would be blast effects and a hail of lethal neutrons but almost no radioactive fallout; this theoretically would cause minimal physical damage to buildings and equipment but kill most living things. The theorized cobalt bomb is, on the contrary, a radioactively "dirty bomb having a cobalt tamper. Instead of generating additional explosive force from fission of the uranium, the cobalt is transmuted into cobalt-60, which has a half-life of 5.26 years and produces energetic (and thus penetrating) gamma rays. The half-life of Co-60 is just long enough so that airborne particles will settle and coat the earth's surface before significant decay has occurred, thus making it impractical to hide in shelters. This prompted physicist Leo Szilard to call it a "doomsday device since it was capable of wiping out life on earth."

----

The idea of the cobalt bomb originated with Leo Szilard who publicized it in Feb. 1950, not as a serious proposal for weapon, but to point out that it would soon be possible in principle to build a weapon that could kill everybody on earth. To design such a theoretical weapon a radioactive isotope is needed that can be dispersed world wide before it decays. Such dispersal takes many months to a few years so the half-life of Co-60 is ideal.

The Co-60 fallout hazard is greater than the fission products from a U-238 blanket because

many fission-produced isotopes have half-lives that are very short, and thus decay before the fallout settles or can be protected against by short-term sheltering;

many fission-produced isotopes have very long half-lives and thus do not produce very intense radiation;
the fission products are not radioactive at all.

The half-life of Co-60 on the other hand is long enough to settle out before significant decay has occurred, and to make it impractical to wait out in shelters, yet is short enough that intense radiation is produced.

Initially gamma radiation fission products from an equivalent size fission-fusion-fission bomb are much more intense than Co-60: 15,000 times more intense at 1 hour; 35 times more intense at 1 week; 5 times more intense at 1 month; and about equal at 6 months. Thereafter fission drops off rapidly so that Co-60 fallout is 8 times more intense than fission at 1 year and 150 times more intense at 5 years. The very long lived isotopes produced by fission would overtake the again Co-60 after about 75 years.

Zinc has been proposed as an alternate candidate for the "doomsday role". The advantage of Zn-64 is that its faster decay leads to greater initial intensity. Disadvantages are that since it makes up only half of natural zinc, it must either be isotopically enriched or the yield will be cut in half; that it is a weaker gamma emitter than Co-60, putting out only one-fourth as many gammas for the same molar quantity; and that substantially amounts will decay during the world-wide dispersal process. Assuming pure Zn-64 is used, the radiation intensity of Zn-65 would initially be twice as much as Co-60. This would decline to being equal in 8 months, in 5 years Co-60 would be 110 times as intense.

Militarily useful radiological weapons would use local (as opposed to world-wide) contamination, and high initial intensities for rapid effects. Prolonged contamination is also undesirable. In this light Zn-64 is possibly better suited to military applications than cobalt, but probably inferior to tantalum or gold. As noted above ordinary "dirty" fusion-fission bombs have very high initial radiation intensities and must also be considered radiological weapons.

No cobalt or other salted bomb has ever been atmospherically tested, and as far as is publicly known none have ever been built. In light of the ready availability of fission-fusion-fission bombs, it is unlikely any special-purpose fallout contamination weapon will ever be developed.

The British did test a bomb that incorporated cobalt as an experimental radiochemical tracer (Antler/Round 1, 14 September 1957). This 1 kt device was exploded at the Tadje site, Maralinga range, Australia. The experiment was regarded as a failure and not repeated.

Well, let us hope that Doomsday Weapons are never built. With enough H-Bombs, we could come
close to a D-Weapon. A Doomsday weapon would not be just a WMD, but a WTD (Weapon of Total Destruction).

Now that efforts for non-proliferation of these nuclear weapons are underway, and with more countries trying to get into the nuclear party, the doomsday cloud looms once again. Let us hope no nation anywhere on earth, threatens humanity with such WTDs.

"The world we've made, as a result of the level of thinking we have done thus far, creates problems we cannot solve at the same level of thinking" -- Albert Einstein.
 

Razor

STABLE GENIUS
Senior Member
Joined
Feb 7, 2011
Messages
7,703
Likes
9,065
Country flag
what would Washington get from this type of fear mongering?? Maybe keep NATO allies in
check?? I also thought it was odd that 100 megatons can fit into a small submarine/drone type
delivery vehicle??
Exactly. 100 MT is a lot of power. Even that 50 MT test of the Tsar Bomba by the USSR was lunacy. The largest Amercan test was I think 25-30 MT.
These days such nukes are not required because missile accuracy (CEP) has incresed 10-20 times, maybe more.

-----------------

#fearmongering: Yeah that NATO thing, you know just to keep NATO tighter.
But more importantly America is now looking to replace its Ohio-Class nuke carrying subs. And they may want more funding to produce better quality products or to explore new ideas (like tactical nuke carrying under-water drone)
 
Last edited:

Razor

STABLE GENIUS
Senior Member
Joined
Feb 7, 2011
Messages
7,703
Likes
9,065
Country flag
maybe detonating it underwater would reduce the destructive power??

A Disturbing thing about this bomb:

B
1)The size of the detonation would trigger a tsunami which would race inland .
what if the tsunami went the other way and hit not involved nations??

2) Russians may have weaponized cobalt for use in nuclear weapons???
(US also may have??) Using Cobalt would essentially pollute a wide area with radiation
A : Maybe. I don't know the physics behind it.

B: You know, I think it would be a lot more efficient to directly hit the target with a nuke (at an altitude above ground, to maximize impact) than to use a tsunami to destroy a target (i.e. under-water detonation.)
 

pmaitra

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2009
Messages
33,267
Likes
19,500
Interesting "confirmation" from Pentagon.

To me, this looks like they need the government to further loosen the purse strings and release another tranche of funds to Pentagon, while the government debt continues to breach $20 trillion mark.

Pentagon can’t account for $6.5 trillion of taxpayer money – IG report
$6.5 Trillion Missing from Defense Department
Audit reveals Army's trillion-dollar accounting gaffes
Trillions Go Missing from the Military: Pentagon Can't Account for $6.5T in Taxpayer Cash
 
Joined
Feb 16, 2009
Messages
25,797
Likes
26,914
Country flag
A : Maybe. I don't know the physics behind it.

B: You know, I think it would be a lot more efficient to directly hit the target with a nuke (at an altitude above ground, to maximize impact) than to use a tsunami to destroy a target (i.e. under-water detonation.)
The whole idea behind this is to evade any missile shield US puts up, instead of Air Russia is taking water route



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

Flame Thrower

Senior Member
Joined
Apr 16, 2016
Messages
1,676
Likes
2,711
Folks to me Bomb is not a big deal to worry about, but propulsion is....

How did they build a miniature nuclear reactor....

Russia has 100 MT bomb for a long time and Russia spends more money to upgrade their nukes and nuke delivery systems than anyone(not sure of China though) in the world....

So, it's obvious that Tzar bomba has been miniaturized....

And never underestimate Mother Russia in nuke delivery systems.....

OR

This news(planted news as Russia can neither confirm nor deny this news) could also be used to get a new defence contacts....

A similar kind of weapon for US....

Better subs/torpedoes...

They has their new sub-class around 20 yrs ago... So, another class sounds quite plausible what could be more beneficial if it is being funded under black project
 

Project Dharma

meh
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 4, 2016
Messages
4,836
Likes
10,808
Insane shit, the race to the end for mankind is on. If its not retarded Mullahs out to get you, its the crazy commies.
 

prohumanity

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 2, 2013
Messages
1,290
Likes
1,352
Country flag
This will lead to one of the two outcomes....end of the world OR birth of multi-polar world !
 

Kshatriya87

Senior Member
Joined
Feb 12, 2014
Messages
8,812
Likes
9,166
:hmm:

These two points (underlined) make me question the article as either fear mongering on washington's part or trolling on moscow's

Submarines don't travel that fast and largest bomb ever detonated was only 50MT during the cold war, and the larger ones these days are like 5 megs.
:dude:
The Tsar bomb you are talking about could have been made up to 100MT. Russians deliberately kept it at 50MT only fearing the consequences of the blast. If they had the tech. then to make 100MT, why not now?
 

Kshatriya87

Senior Member
Joined
Feb 12, 2014
Messages
8,812
Likes
9,166
what would Washington get from this type of fear mongering?? Maybe keep NATO allies in
check?? I also thought it was odd that 100 megatons can fit into a small submarine/drone type
delivery vehicle??
Tsar bomba with a yield of 57MT was 8m by 2.1m. Depending on the size of the sub drone, you can fit a 100MT bomb.

The point is, they say that the drone is nuclear powered. This worries me as the drone would have to be quite big to fit the bomb as well as the reactor.
 

airtel

Senior Member
Joined
Dec 25, 2015
Messages
3,408
Likes
7,644
Country flag

Global Defence

New threads

Articles

Top