News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:A Burning B-52 Nearly Caused A Nuclear Catastrophe by dboreham on Sunday September 22, 2019 @01:12PM (#21042486)
If you read the literature it turns out that's in some cases wishful thinking. You'd never get full yield, but no chain reaction turns out to not be guaranteed in the older designs.
Re:A Burning B-52 Nearly Caused A Nuclear Catastrophe by moltensodium on Sunday September 22, 2019 @01:49PM (#21042743)
Can you point me towards what you read on this outside of the article? Not doubting you it's just been like 500 years since I studied nuclear chem and I'm not sure what literature you're talking about.
Re:A Burning B-52 Nearly Caused A Nuclear Catastrophe by agurk on Sunday September 22, 2019 @01:58PM (#21042801)
A good introduction is Eric Schlosser's Command and Control. For the points here the concept of one-point safe is the idea of if a nuclear device is likely to detonate in an uncontrolled situation. A good definition I found was[0]:

> What is one-point safe?

> Apart from preventing unauthorized use, it is equally important to ensure that the weapons do not explode accidentally. For example, if it is accidentally dropped dur­ing transportation (such incidents have occurred), it should not explode. A nuclear weapon is one-point safe if, when the High Explosive inside the weapon is initiated and detonated at any single point, the probability of producing a nuclear yield exceeding 4 pounds TNT equivalent is less than 1 in one million.

A surprising number of early nuclear devices were not one-point safe.

[0] http://www.nucleardarkness.org/nuclear/nuclearandconventiona...