Neutron bomb

Could a neutron bomb detonated at a high altitude sterilize the Donbas of life and leave low enough residual radiation so the Khazarians could inhabit the areas within a year?

  1. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Not really. The lethal radius really isn't that far.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      But if it's radiation is shining down it has less atmosphere to pass through.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Radiation drops as the square of distance. Double the distance, 1/4 of the irradiance.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >radiation output of a tiny miniscule star detonated by humans
        vs
        >radiation output of a massive star larger than several jupiters

  2. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    No, a neutron device would make the land uninhabitable for at least 50 years.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Neutrons aren't radioactive.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        This has to be bait. They themselves aren't radioactive, but the neutrons cause atoms struck by then to become unstable isotopes which are radioactive.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Neutron bombs are basically as radioactive. They just have fallout over a smaller area. The area is smaller not because of wonder physics with neutron bombs or some shit, it's just because the bomb yield is low. Carpeting an area with neutron bombs irradiates it functionally as much as one giant bomb.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >functionally as much as one giant bomb.

          IIRC the size of the blast scales faster than the radiation zone, so smaller bombs would have proportionately less radiation.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        high energy neutrons ionise molecules

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Neutrons ARE radiation. They get shot out at relativistic speed and end up colliding with your molecules.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Holy fucking shit you're stupid. Neutrons are both ionizing radiation and themselves beta decay into protons. Goddammit I hate how retarded everyone who tries to discuss anything nuclear is.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        oh you

  3. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Yes, although neutron radiations tends to damage steel.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      While it will eventually transmute into a different metal, you typically need several years to decades of neutron bombardment to have any notable change.

  4. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Stop thinking about those Khazar milkers.

  5. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    bump

  6. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    wtf is a neutron bomb

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Hypothetical nuclear device which produces neutron rays, killing people but leaving infrastructure "intact"

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >Hypothetical nuclear device
        The only thing hypothetical is your chance of ever putting your dicc in a real woman. Neutron bombs have been built and fielded

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >Hypothetical
        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/W79_Artillery-Fired_Atomic_Projectile

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      It's a nuclear weapon with instantaneous radiation with a greater distance than it's explosive effects.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      it's what they used to call jimmy neutron's mom when she was young

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >wtf is a neutron bomb
      a neutron bomb is a nuclear bomb without the uranium neutron reflector casing

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Man that book was so right in the middle between total cringe and maximum kino.
        >t. German who got weirded out by the super old school names of the young people in the story

  7. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Them leaving infrastructure intact is a massive overstatement - its still a huge fucking bomb

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      A brief google search told me a 1 kiloton neutron bomb would severely damage non-reinforced buildings in a 600m radius, potentially causing collapses. The shockwave would be enough to throw a person off their feet at the 600m mark, but the pressure wave itself wouldn't be lethal. Any unsheltered person out to 900m will be immediately incapacitated and die within a day or 2. Anyone exposed beyond that to 1300m will have 1-2 weeks to live. People between 1300m and 1450m meters will fall ill for weeks with a 50% of death. It drops off pretty quick from there.

      The effect zones are changed by how humid the weather is, with dry air being less able to absorb the radiation than humid air. A person who is indoors or behind a building will be significantly protected, depending on what the walls are made off. Surviving near the centre of the blast is very possible if even just 30cm of concrete is providing shielding. You can see why we stopped keeping neutron bombs in our stocks. Even a standard modern tank would provide sufficient shielding to protect the crew.

      FYI, the Beirut explosion was 1.5KT, but it was pure blast and thermal energy. 40% of the energy in a neutron bomb is the radiation. Imagine if pic related was about 2/3s smaller and that's the physical explosion of a 1 kiloton neutron bomb.

  8. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Probably not. Neutron radiation tends to create unstable isotopes, essentially creating fallout. Fallout 76, to be precise, in toxicity.

    But seriously. bombard iron with neutrons and you'll often get super unstable iron isotopes that decay into cobalt, then nickel, then copper, releasing radiation with every transmutation.

  9. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    The kill radius of a neutron burst is smaller than the kill radius of the heat and blast effects that create it, so anyone you're intending to kill with neutrons is going to get killed by the blast and heat anyway
    It's like coating 00 buckshot in arsenic, shooting someone in the face, and then say "I was trying to kill them with arsenic poisoning"

Your email address will not be published.