Radar

Andrew Reilly wrote:
> On Sun, 15 Jun 2008 07:29:48 -0500, Vladimir Vassilevsky wrote:
> 
>> In our days,
>> birds can carry small nuclear bombs as well as other WMDs.
> 
> Aren't nukes necessarily rather too heavy for a  bird to carry?  I don't 
> know much about'em, but I thought that there was a minimum size required 
> to make "boom", as opposed to "fizz".  Not that fizz would be any kind of 
> good thing either...

I suppose I could figure out the weight from the dimension. If I recall 
my calculations, a ball of highly enriched uranium would need to be 
about 12 cm diameter to sustain a chain reaction. The weight of the 
trigger would be comparable. Are rocs extinct?

Jerry
-- 
Engineering is the art of making what you want from things you can get.
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯

Jerry Avins wrote:
> Andrew Reilly wrote:
> 
>> On Sun, 15 Jun 2008 07:29:48 -0500, Vladimir Vassilevsky wrote:
>>
>>> In our days,
>>> birds can carry small nuclear bombs as well as other WMDs.
>>
>> Aren't nukes necessarily rather too heavy for a  bird to carry?  I 
>> don't know much about'em, but I thought that there was a minimum size 
>> required to make "boom", as opposed to "fizz".  Not that fizz would be 
>> any kind of good thing either...
> 
> 
> I suppose I could figure out the weight from the dimension. If I recall 
> my calculations, a ball of highly enriched uranium would need to be 
> about 12 cm diameter to sustain a chain reaction. The weight of the 
> trigger would be comparable. Are rocs extinct?

IIRC the critical mass of the solution of Cf251 in the heavy water 
should be at the order of several gramms...

VLV

Andrew Reilly wrote:
> On Sun, 15 Jun 2008 07:29:48 -0500, Vladimir Vassilevsky wrote:
> 
>> In our days,
>> birds can carry small nuclear bombs as well as other WMDs.
> 
> Aren't nukes necessarily rather too heavy for a  bird to carry?  I don't 
> know much about'em, but I thought that there was a minimum size required 
> to make "boom", as opposed to "fizz".  Not that fizz would be any kind of 
> good thing either...
> 
> Cheers,
> 

It's not a matter of where he /grips/ it.  It's a simple matter of 
weight ratios!  A five ounce bird cannot carry a 1 pound coconut.

-- 
Jim Thomas            Principal Applications Engineer  Bittware, Inc
jthomas@bittware.com  http://www.bittware.com    (603) 226-0404 x536
Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.
   - Arthur C. Clarke

On Jun 16, 11:18 am, Jim Thomas <jtho...@bittware.com> wrote:
> Andrew Reilly wrote:
> > On Sun, 15 Jun 2008 07:29:48 -0500, Vladimir Vassilevsky wrote:
>
> >> In our days,
> >> birds can carry small nuclear bombs as well as other WMDs.
>
> > Aren't nukes necessarily rather too heavy for a  bird to carry?  I don't
> > know much about'em, but I thought that there was a minimum size required
> > to make "boom", as opposed to "fizz".  Not that fizz would be any kind of
> > good thing either...
>
> > Cheers,
>
> It's not a matter of where he /grips/ it.  It's a simple matter of
> weight ratios!  A five ounce bird cannot carry a 1 pound coconut.
>
> --
> Jim Thomas            Principal Applications Engineer  Bittware, Inc
> jtho...@bittware.com  http://www.bittware.com   (603) 226-0404 x536
> Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.
>    - Arthur C. Clarke

Am I the only one who hears the clomping of coconuts in the background.

Jim Thomas wrote:

> It's not a matter of where he /grips/ it.  It's a simple matter of 
> weight ratios!  A five ounce bird cannot carry a 1 pound coconut.

But, wait, african or european?

bye,

-- 

piergiorgio

On Fri, 13 Jun 2008 00:19:56 -0700 (PDT), kronecker@yahoo.co.uk wrote:

>What's the smallest object that can be resolved on radar? eg could a
>large model aircraft be seen or would it be confused with say a large
>bird? How low does radar go in a city?
>Why am I asking? I have reason to believe that the next generation of
>terrorists will use UAVs to hit their targets. In fact this is well
>known and no secret. So what can be done to stop such an attack?
>
>K.

Hello Kronecker,
   The only country that's making a somewhat  
meaningful effort to confront the Muslim terrorists 
(the practinioners of the religion of peace) is the U.S.
However, in the U.S.:

[1] the politicians are far more concerned with 
fighting with their political opponents than fighting the 
evil of Muslim terrorism. 

[2] the U.S. contains a huge portion of the population 
that believes that anyone opposed to the U.S.'s way of 
life must be correct.

[3] we have huge number of numbskull government employees 
that think if we're "nice" to the Muslim terroists, then 
maybe the Muslim terrorists won't kill us.  Ha ha, what joke.

My suggestion to eliminate the "attack" that you address is to 
find every Muslim terrorist under the age of 25, and buy them 
a house with a swimming pool in California, and buy them an SUV 
to drive.  Because the average young American woman will have 
sex with anyone wearing pants who says, "I love you", 
the potential terrorists should have no problem finding sex.
(Which is apparently only possible with animals for a single 
guy in the Middle East and Afganistan.) 

Once these poor Muslim terrorist bastards find out that 
there's more to life than wanting to kill people who are 
not Muslim, then they'll maybe stop sawing off the heads 
of innocent people, and stop strapping bombs to themselves 
and their women.

Anyway, just a few suggestions.

[-Rick-]

Rick Lyons wrote:


> The only country that's making a somewhat  
> meaningful effort to confront the Muslim terrorists 
> (the practinioners of the religion of peace) is the U.S.

The only man that has a somewhat meaningful intention although rather 
naive opinion is R. J. Lyons. Good to see anyway.

VLV

> My suggestion to eliminate the "attack" that you address is to
> find every Muslim terrorist under the age of 25, and buy them
> a house with a swimming pool in California, and buy them an SUV
> to drive.

	Nah, we tried that in france, and it didn't work out ;)

Eric Jacobsen wrote:
> Even among the military UAVs most are not stealthy, like the Global
> Hawk or Predator, or many of the smaller examples as well.

Huh? Where do you think the shape of the Predator comes from? It looks 
like a basic stealth design to me. I don't think they have done much 
about the thermal signature, but they seem to have done the basic low 
cost radar stealth work on the body.

Steve

Rick Lyons wrote:
(snip)
> 
> My suggestion to eliminate the "attack" that you address is to 
> find every Muslim terrorist under the age of 25, and buy them 
> a house with a swimming pool in California, and buy them an SUV 
> to drive.  Because the average young American woman will have 
> sex with anyone wearing pants who says, "I love you", 
> the potential terrorists should have no problem finding sex.
> (Which is apparently only possible with animals for a single 
> guy in the Middle East and Afganistan.) 
> 
> Once these poor Muslim terrorist bastards find out that 
> there's more to life than wanting to kill people who are 
> not Muslim, then they'll maybe stop sawing off the heads 
> of innocent people, and stop strapping bombs to themselves 
> and their women.
> 
> Anyway, just a few suggestions.
> 
> [-Rick-]

A more practical and just solution would be to force the Israeli 
Government to allow the Palestinians to return to their homes.  You may 
recalll that they were driven out by Israeli terrorists some time ago, 
and many have held on to their property title documents all these fifty 
years.

John