454:
The joint DOE/DoD RRW POG was tasked to oversee a laboratory design competition for a RRW warhead with FPU goal of FY 2012. The POG assessed the technical feasibility including certification without nuclear testing, design definition, manufacturing, and an initial cost assessment to determine whether the proposed candidates met the RRW study objectives and requirements. The POG presented the RRW study results to the NWC in
November 2006 and the NWC decided that the RRW for submarine-launched ballistic missiles is feasible and should proceed to complete a Phase 2A design definition and cost study. In addition, the NWC determined that the RRW is to be adopted as the strategy for maintaining a long term safe, secure and reliable nuclear deterrent and as such also directed the initiation of a conceptual study for an additional RRW design. The next steps include detailed design and preliminary cost estimates of the RRW to confirm that the RRW design provides surety enhancements, can be certified without nuclear testing, is cost-effective, and will support both stockpile and infrastructure transformation. Once this acquisition planning is completed and if the NWC decides to proceed to engineering and production development, outyear funding (FY 2009 – FY 2012) to support an executable program will be submitted.
529:, H.R. 4986, Section 3111, forbids the expenditure of funds for the RRW program beyond Phase 2A; in effect, this prevents the RRW program from going forward without explicit Congressional authorization. Section 3121 Subsection 1 requires the study of the reuse of previously manufactured plutonium cores in any RRW warheads, so as to avoid the manufacture of additional plutonium cores. Section 3124 reaffirms the commitment of the U.S. to the
169:
unexpected contingencies as a key program driver. However, Congress has rejected the notion that the RRW is needed to meet new military requirements. In providing funds for 2006, the
Appropriations Committee specified, "any weapons design under the RRW program must stay within the military requirements of the existing deployed stockpile and any new weapon design must stay within the design parameters validated by past nuclear tests".
70:, invested large amounts of money and technical resources into nuclear weapons design, testing, and maintenance. Many of the weapons designed required high upkeep costs, justified primarily by their Cold War context and the specific and technically sophisticated applications they were created for. With the end of the Cold War, however,
273:
471:
The increase funds the startup of activities in support of a NWC decision to have RRW proceed to engineering and production development. Activities include design, engineering and certification work such as finalization of requirements, material studies, technology demonstrations, detailed design and
251:
The RRW program has not to date publicly announced that it has developed any new nuclear weapon designs which are intended to be placed into production. Presumably, once that occurs, the weapons will receive numbers in the US warhead designation sequence, which currently runs from the Mark 1 nuclear
453:
The NWC approved the RRW Feasibility Study that began in May 2005 and completed in
November 2006. The goal of the RRW study was to identify designs that will sustain long term confidence in a safe, secure and reliable stockpile and enable transformation to a responsive nuclear weapon infrastructure.
549:
Opponents of the RRW program believe it has nothing to do with making US weapons safer or more reliable, but is merely an excuse for designing new weapons and maintaining jobs at the weapons laboratories. They note that the
Secretaries of Defense and Energy have certified that the existing nuclear
493:
phase 2 = competitive feasibility study; phase 2A = design definition and cost study by the lab to which DOE awarded the project; phase 3 = development engineering (at beginning of this phase warhead is assigned a #); phase 4 = production engineering; phase 5 = first production; phase 6 = quantity
561:
Critics maintain that this innocuous-sounding program could significantly damage US national security. Critics believe an expansive RRW program would anger US allies as well as hostile nations. They worry it would disrupt the global cooperation in nonproliferation that is vital to diplomacy with
168:
NNSA officials believe the program is needed to maintain nuclear weapons expertise in order to rapidly adapt, repair, or modify existing weapons or develop new weapons as requirements evolve. They see the ability to adapt to changing military needs rather than maintain additional forces for
164:
The concept underlying the RRW program is that the US weapons laboratories can design new nuclear weapons that are highly reliable and easy and safe to manufacture, monitor, and test. If that proves to be possible, designers could adapt a common set of core design components to various use
307:
warhead replacement as early as 1991. The W89 design was already equipped with all then-current safety features, including insensitive high explosives, fire-resistant pits, and advanced detonator safety systems. The W89 was also reportedly designed using recycled pits from the earlier
427:
The next-generation warheads will be larger and more stable than the existing ones but slightly less powerful, according to government officials. They might contain "use controls" that would enable the military to disable the weapons by remote control if they are stolen by
74:
has ceased in the United States, and new warhead development has been significantly reduced. As a result, the need for high technical performance of warheads has decreased considerably, and the need for a longer-lasting and reliable stockpile has taken a high priority.
78:
Prior nuclear weapons produced by the U.S. had historically become extremely compact, low weight, highly integrated, and low-margin designs which used exotic materials. In many cases the components were toxic and/or unstable. A number of older US designs used
558:, "It takes an extraordinary flight of imagination to postulate a modern new arsenal composed of such untested designs that would be more reliable, safe and effective than the current U.S. arsenal based on more than 1,000 tests since 1945".
247:
However, the full SEAB disavowed the Task Force's recommendations regarding the RRW, because the Task Force did not consider the program's potentially adverse impacts on U.S. nonproliferation objectives, which were beyond its expertise.
207:
Produce new weapons with the full spectrum of security and use control safety features available today, some of which are intrinsic to the basic design of a weapon and cannot possibly be retrofitted into the design of an existing weapon
502:
The FY08 RRW budget therefore indicates that one of the RRW designs has been approved and is entering the design definition and cost study phase. The document does not state which of the RRW designs has been selected.
506:
Historically, the weapon's nuclear series identification is assigned at the entrance to phase 3, and if the design proceeds forwards to complete phase 2 and enter phase 3 this can be expected in 1–2 years.
291:
One of the selection reasons given was that the LLNL proposed design was more closely tied to historical underground tested warhead designs. It was described by Thomas P. D'Agostino, acting head of the
408:
In an April 15, 2006, article by Walter Pincus in the
Washington Post, Linton F. Brooks, administrator of the US National Nuclear Safety Administration, the US nuclear weapon design agency within the
550:
weapons stockpile is safe and reliable in each of the last nine years. The existing stockpile was extensively tested before the US entered the moratorium on nuclear weapons tests. According to
144:
has been a major topic of research at the weapons laboratories in recent decades. Though many at the labs still insist on scientific uncertainty on the question, a study commissioned by the
1131:
730:
U.S. Congress. House. Making
Appropriations for the Energy and Water Development for the Fiscal Year Ending September 30, 2006, and for Other Purposes. H.Rept. 109-275. p. 159.
594:
420:, and that a selection of one of those designs would be made by November 2006, to allow the RRW development program to be included in the Fiscal 2008 US government budget.
435:
On
December 1, 2006, the NNSA announced that it had decided to move forwards with the RRW program after analyzing the initial LLNL and LANL RRW proposals. At that time,
331:
The W89 warhead design was a 13.3-inch-diameter (340 mm) by 40.8-inch-long (1,040 mm) weapon, with a weight of 324 pounds (147 kg) and yield of 200
1445:
526:
172:
According to a Task Force of the
Secretary of Energy's Advisory Board (SEAB), the RRW program and weapon designs should have the following characteristics:
1171:
1124:
472:
concurrent engineering with the production plants, and modeling, simulation and analysis in support of certification without additional nuclear testing.
719:
328:
in
January 1988. The lead designer, Bruce Goodwin, referred to the primary as the "SKUA9" design which he said had been tested a number of times.
2343:
1117:
2348:
31:
design and bomb family that was intended to be simple, reliable and to provide a long-lasting, low-maintenance future nuclear force for the
1166:
2338:
1438:
383:
layers with another material, and increased performance margins throughout the design, possibly including more fissile material in the
978:
REPORT OF THE SPECIAL COMMITTEE OF THE ACADEMIC SENATE ON THE UNIVERSITY'S RELATIONS WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY (DOE) LABORATORIES
676:
541:
President Obama's 2009 Department of Energy budget calls for development work on the
Reliable Replacement Warhead project to cease.
264:
weapons could conceivably be type-standardized and numbered prior to any RRW reaching that point, if the RNEP program does proceed.
260:
nuclear warhead, which was cancelled in the 1990s. RRW designs would presumably receive designations after that number, though new
293:
145:
40:
742:"Report of the Nuclear Weapons Complex Infrastructure Task Force: Recommendations for the Nuclear Weapons Complex of the Future"
1431:
1407:
1140:
514:
413:
299:
LLNL staff have previously hinted in the press that LLNL was considering a design entry based on the tested but never deployed
285:
156:
have a credible lifetime of at least 100 years". The oldest pits currently in the US arsenal are still less than 50 years old.
432:
Based on prior weapons programs, the RRW should be assigned a numerical weapon designation when the design selection is made.
2239:
1759:
494:
production and stockpiling. Note: Projects entering phase 1 (concept study) and phase 7 (=retirement) have not been included.
380:
91:). Some of these explosives have cracked in warheads in storage, resulting in dangerous storage and disassembly conditions.
1813:
1786:
926:
1807:
1791:
409:
1801:
1094:
660:
231:
Comparable or improved levels of reliability to existing designs, using larger margins and simpler components (3.1.5)
358:
741:
2065:
1796:
1454:
1084:
417:
114:
1729:
1724:
1346:
950:
767:
1397:
691:
Highs Explosives in Stockpile Surveillance Indicate Constancy. Science and Technology Review. Dec. 1996.
384:
243:(in passing) Designs avoiding the use of beryllium or beryllium Oxide in the weapon fission reflector (4.6)
1392:
1154:
1076:
965:
819:
Report to Congress: Assessment of the Safety of US Nuclear Weapons and Related Nuclear Test Requirements
117:
layers was a major health hazard to bomb manufacturer and maintenance staff. The long term stability of
2291:
1776:
1176:
673:
DEFENSE NUCLEAR FACILITIES SAFETY BOARD - Pantex Plant Activity Report for Week Ending January 16, 2004
478:
Funding is listed as $ 25 million for FY 2006, $ 28 million for FY 2007, and $ 89 million for FY 2008.
392:
858:
648:
2286:
1311:
316:
to provide the temperature resistance. The W89 warhead was test fired in the 1980s. It had entered
1099:
423:
The article confirmed prior descriptions of the RRW, describing the weapons in the following terms:
412:, announced that two competing designs for the Reliable Replacement Warhead were being finalized by
2281:
2276:
1551:
1301:
1286:
1159:
530:
344:
201:
141:
80:
1642:
989:
237:
Designs which can be designed and certified without necessarily undergoing nuclear testing (3.1.7)
2266:
1489:
1212:
1207:
636:
589:
296:, as having been based on a design which was test fired in the 1980s, but never entered service.
133:
2307:
2271:
1217:
807:
An Assessment of US Nuclear Weapons and related Nuclear Test requirements: a post-Bush analysis
703:
364:
149:
122:
36:
791:
121:
metal, which may lose strength, crack, or otherwise degrade over time is also a concern. (See
83:
types which degraded over time, some of which became dangerously unstable in short lifetimes (
2217:
2212:
2207:
2202:
2135:
2125:
2110:
2085:
2080:
2075:
2060:
2040:
2030:
2025:
1995:
1985:
1754:
1749:
1734:
1647:
1637:
1632:
1622:
1612:
1607:
1402:
707:
584:
369:
352:
261:
1034:
877:
533:
and encourages the mutual reduction in armament of the U.S. and Russia through negotiation.
2000:
1975:
1970:
1898:
1893:
1883:
1878:
1873:
1868:
1863:
1858:
1853:
1848:
1843:
1828:
1719:
1688:
1602:
1597:
1546:
1541:
1536:
1531:
1526:
672:
240:
Consolidation of many nuclear weapon production and maintenance functions to one site (4.1)
165:
requirements, such as different sized missile warheads, different nuclear bomb types, etc.
47:
779:
8:
1592:
1587:
1582:
1577:
1521:
1516:
1511:
1506:
1501:
1109:
1067:
863:
482:
908:
892:
126:
1081:
1326:
1291:
1197:
339:). As noted above, major safety features inherent in the tested W89 design include:
63:
1058:
977:
846:
624:
612:
510:
The design is intended for first production unit (FPU) delivery by the end of 2012.
2035:
2010:
2005:
1980:
1954:
1938:
1933:
1928:
1923:
1918:
1913:
1908:
1903:
1888:
1703:
1561:
1054:
United States Nuclear Weapons Program: The Role of the Reliable Replacement Warhead
1053:
1006:"The Reliable Replacement Warhead Program: A Slippery Slope to New Nuclear Weapons"
1048:
1698:
1556:
1366:
1255:
818:
806:
680:
110:
71:
1423:
1072:
1005:
102:) currently in use are highly stable and may even become more stable over time.
1462:
1321:
570:
and to controlling clandestine trafficking in nuclear materials and equipment.
447:
According to the FY 2008 NNSA budget (pp 88), the RRW program is described as:
332:
137:
1090:
62:, the United States, in an effort to achieve and maintain an advantage in the
2332:
1475:
1387:
1371:
1265:
1245:
834:
211:
Designs which trade off higher weight and larger volume to maximise: (3.1.4)
153:
32:
2185:
1260:
692:
555:
551:
67:
28:
1693:
1270:
1250:
1240:
567:
376:
Modifications for the RRW design would probably have included replacing
1483:
1412:
1202:
1192:
837:, Blue Ridge Environmental Defense League, 2001, accessed March 2, 2007
794:, Ira Hoffman, Alameda Times-Star, Feb 6, 2006. Accessed March 2, 2007
280:
warhead design may have been the basis for the winning LLNL RRW design.
253:
517:
RRW design had been selected for the initial RRW production version.
377:
336:
288:
RRW design had been selected for the initial RRW production version.
204:) and replace all existing weapons which use other explosives (3.1.2)
191:
Be capable of conducting an underground nuclear test within 18 months
118:
106:
439:
had not selected which of the two designs to proceed forwards with.
176:
Support an adaptable 1,700-2,200 weapon sustained force level (3.1)
2317:
2312:
388:
324:
development engineering and was assigned the numerical designation
313:
95:
84:
59:
912:
896:
881:
739:
46:
In 2008, Congress denied funding for the program, and in 2009 the
1495:
579:
1062:
847:
University of California 1989 nuclear weapons labs status report
223:
Modularity (primaries, secondaries, non-nuclear) across systems
1093:
Congressional Research Service, updated February 8, 2007, via
196:
Produce all new weapons using Insensitive High Explosive (see
1990:
1316:
1296:
595:
Renovation of the nuclear weapon arsenal of the United States
99:
88:
809:, URCL-LR-109503, R.E. Kidder, 1991. Accessed March 2, 2007
179:
Resolve an issue with the weapons stockpile within 12 months
944:
821:, URCL-LR-107454, R.E. Kidder, 1991, Accessed March 2, 2007
563:
348:
320:
technical definition and cost study in November, 1986, and
197:
1139:
1073:"Concerns about the Reliable Replacement Warheads Program"
708:
http://www.nukewatch.org/facts/nwd/JASON_ReportPuAging.pdf
226:
Maximizing component reuse and minimizing life-cycle costs
2245:
2222:
2171:
2160:
2155:
2150:
2145:
2140:
2130:
2120:
2115:
2105:
2100:
2095:
2090:
2070:
2055:
2050:
2045:
2020:
2015:
1765:
1744:
1739:
1672:
1667:
1662:
1657:
1652:
1627:
1617:
1341:
1336:
1331:
661:
Relatives of 3 Killed in Blast At Nuclear Plant Lose Suit
309:
304:
300:
277:
257:
927:"U.S. Prepares to Overhaul Arsenal of Nuclear Warheads"
527:
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008
951:
Nuclear Weapons Officials Agree to Pursue RRW Strategy
272:
94:
Most experts believe that the insensitive explosives (
39:
in 2004, it became a centerpiece of the plans of the
1172:
National Energy Research Scientific Computing Center
1091:"Nuclear Weapons: The Reliable Replacement Warhead"
1082:"Nuclear Weapons: The Reliable Replacement Warhead"
740:
Secretary of Energy Advisory Board (July 13, 2005).
663:
from Oct 3, 1981 New York Times, Accessed 2006-05-03
531:Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons
220:Ease of maintenance, surveillance, and disposition
1453:
909:Principles of Nuclear Weapons Security and Safety
2330:
768:Design Selected for Reliable Replacement Warhead
182:Adapt a weapon to a new requirement in 18 months
763:
761:
1021:Editorial, "Busywork for Nuclear Scientists",
513:On March 2, 2007, the NNSA announced that the
284:On March 2, 2007, the NNSA announced that the
43:(NNSA) to remake the nuclear weapons complex.
1439:
1125:
188:Be ready for full production within 48 months
1167:National Atmospheric Release Advisory Center
999:
997:
961:
959:
758:
544:
481:As defined in an earlier UC report, nuclear
303:design. This warhead had been proposed as a
152:group concluded in November 2006 that "most
859:"Special Report: New Nukes Are Good Nukes?"
1446:
1432:
1132:
1118:
802:
800:
649:LLNL explosives accident training web page
994:
956:
637:Explosives section in nuclear weapons FAQ
50:called for work on the program to cease.
693:http://www.llnl.gov/str/pdfs/12_96.2.pdf
294:National Nuclear Security Administration
271:
146:National Nuclear Security Administration
41:National Nuclear Security Administration
812:
797:
217:Inexpensive manufacture and disassembly
2344:Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory
2331:
1408:Sustained Spheromak Physics Experiment
1141:Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory
1106:, July 6, 2006 (subscription required)
1003:
924:
780:Govt. Picks Design for Nuclear Warhead
706:group, (20 November 2006), online at
515:Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory
414:Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory
351:as its main explosive ingredient (see
286:Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory
2349:Nuclear warheads of the United States
1427:
1113:
980:, Nov 21, 1989, accessed Feb 11, 2007
343:Insensitive and fire-resistant LX-17
214:Certification without nuclear testing
953:, Dec 1, 2006, accessed Feb 11, 2007
770:, NNSA Press release, March 2, 2007.
312:nuclear weapon program, recoated in
185:Design a new weapon within 36 months
1814:Tactical Atomic Demolition Munition
625:Warhead Accidents at Banthebomb.org
393:Teller-Ulam design: Basic principle
13:
2339:Nuclear bombs of the United States
1808:Special Atomic Demolition Munition
831:Pit Tubes and Pit Re-Use at Pantex
410:United States Department of Energy
372:detonation chain safety mechanisms
267:
14:
2360:
1802:Medium Atomic Demolition Munition
1095:Federation of American Scientists
1042:
880:at the Nuclear Weapon Archive at
720:Statement of Thomas P. D’Agostino
613:W68 warhead at globalsecurity.org
347:, a type of high explosive using
1100:"Nuclear weapons: The next nuke"
925:Pincus, Walter (15 April 2006).
562:emerging nuclear powers such as
387:and a thicker radiation case or
1028:
1015:
1004:Civiak, Robert (January 2006).
983:
971:
918:
902:
899:website, accessed March 5, 2007
886:
871:
851:
840:
824:
785:
773:
733:
724:
1085:Congressional Research Service
835:Plutonium: the last Five Years
782:, NY Times / AP, March 2, 2007
713:
697:
685:
666:
654:
642:
630:
618:
606:
437:NNSA's Nuclear Weapons Council
418:Los Alamos National Laboratory
27:) was a proposed new American
1:
1455:United States nuclear devices
792:Scientists Dream Up New Nukes
600:
140:of the weapons suffered from
53:
2166:Reliable Replacement Warhead
1398:Laser Inertial Fusion Energy
1307:Reliable Replacement Warhead
1059:Reliable Replacement Warhead
467:Reliable Replacement Warhead
132:The question of whether the
21:Reliable Replacement Warhead
7:
1393:Inertial confinement fusion
1155:Mirror Fusion Test Facility
1077:Council for a Livable World
911:, Carey Sublette, 1997, at
747:. U.S. Department of Energy
679:September 23, 2006, at the
573:
10:
2365:
1177:National Ignition Facility
398:
262:RNEP nuclear bunker buster
159:
16:Proposed US nuclear weapon
2300:
2259:
2232:
2195:
2184:
1963:
1947:
1836:
1827:
1775:
1712:
1681:
1570:
1474:
1461:
1380:
1359:
1279:
1233:
1226:
1185:
1147:
915:, accessed March 11, 2007
545:Criticisms of the program
1302:Micropower impulse radar
1160:Tandem Mirror Experiment
1068:DOE argument for the RRW
913:nuclearweaponarchive.org
897:nuclearweaponarchive.org
882:nuclearweaponarchive.org
345:Polymer-bonded explosive
202:Plastic bonded explosive
129:for technical context.)
1087:, updated March 9, 2006
1025:(15 January 2007): A18.
968:, accessed Feb 11, 2007
893:Permissive Action Links
590:List of nuclear weapons
536:
520:
442:
403:
134:plutonium-gallium alloy
365:Permissive Action Link
281:
123:Nuclear weapons design
37:United States Congress
1403:Stockpile stewardship
1035:Drell_Goodby_fnl.indd
585:Nuclear weapon design
370:Strong link weak link
353:Insensitive munitions
275:
966:the 2008 NNSA budget
675:Accessed 2006-05-03
48:Obama administration
35:. Initiated by the
1102:By Geoff Brumfiel,
1011:. Tri-Valley CAREs.
864:Scientific American
651:Accessed 2006-05-03
639:Accessed 2006-05-03
627:Accessed 2006-05-03
615:Accessed 2006-05-03
483:weapons engineering
148:to the independent
1063:globalsecurity.org
990:www.whitehouse.gov
359:Fire-resistant pit
282:
234:Lower cost (3.1.6)
127:Teller-Ulam design
2326:
2325:
2255:
2254:
2180:
2179:
1823:
1822:
1777:Atomic demolition
1421:
1420:
1355:
1354:
1327:Slapper detonator
1292:LLNL RISE process
1198:ASCI Blue Pacific
381:neutron reflector
333:kilotonnes of TNT
115:neutron reflector
109:and highly toxic
64:nuclear arms race
2356:
2193:
2192:
1834:
1833:
1472:
1471:
1448:
1441:
1434:
1425:
1424:
1231:
1230:
1134:
1127:
1120:
1111:
1110:
1037:
1032:
1026:
1019:
1013:
1012:
1010:
1001:
992:
987:
981:
975:
969:
963:
954:
948:
942:
941:
939:
938:
922:
916:
906:
900:
890:
884:
875:
869:
868:
855:
849:
844:
838:
828:
822:
816:
810:
804:
795:
789:
783:
777:
771:
765:
756:
755:
753:
752:
746:
737:
731:
728:
722:
717:
711:
701:
695:
689:
683:
670:
664:
658:
652:
646:
640:
634:
628:
622:
616:
610:
2364:
2363:
2359:
2358:
2357:
2355:
2354:
2353:
2329:
2328:
2327:
2322:
2296:
2251:
2228:
2187:
2176:
1959:
1943:
1819:
1778:
1771:
1708:
1677:
1566:
1466:
1464:
1457:
1452:
1422:
1417:
1376:
1367:Ernest Lawrence
1351:
1275:
1222:
1181:
1143:
1138:
1045:
1040:
1033:
1029:
1020:
1016:
1008:
1002:
995:
988:
984:
976:
972:
964:
957:
949:
945:
936:
934:
931:Washington Post
923:
919:
907:
903:
891:
887:
876:
872:
857:
856:
852:
845:
841:
829:
825:
817:
813:
805:
798:
790:
786:
778:
774:
766:
759:
750:
748:
744:
738:
734:
729:
725:
718:
714:
702:
698:
690:
686:
681:Wayback Machine
671:
667:
659:
655:
647:
643:
635:
631:
623:
619:
611:
607:
603:
576:
554:and Ambassador
547:
539:
523:
445:
406:
401:
270:
268:Selected design
162:
111:beryllium oxide
72:nuclear testing
56:
29:nuclear warhead
17:
12:
11:
5:
2362:
2352:
2351:
2346:
2341:
2324:
2323:
2321:
2320:
2315:
2310:
2304:
2302:
2298:
2297:
2295:
2294:
2289:
2284:
2279:
2274:
2269:
2263:
2261:
2260:Primary stages
2257:
2256:
2253:
2252:
2250:
2249:
2243:
2236:
2234:
2230:
2229:
2227:
2226:
2220:
2215:
2210:
2205:
2199:
2197:
2190:
2182:
2181:
2178:
2177:
2175:
2174:
2169:
2163:
2158:
2153:
2148:
2143:
2138:
2133:
2128:
2123:
2118:
2113:
2108:
2103:
2098:
2093:
2088:
2083:
2078:
2073:
2068:
2063:
2058:
2053:
2048:
2043:
2038:
2033:
2028:
2023:
2018:
2013:
2008:
2003:
1998:
1993:
1988:
1983:
1978:
1973:
1967:
1965:
1961:
1960:
1958:
1957:
1951:
1949:
1945:
1944:
1942:
1941:
1936:
1931:
1926:
1921:
1916:
1911:
1906:
1901:
1896:
1891:
1886:
1881:
1876:
1871:
1866:
1861:
1856:
1851:
1846:
1840:
1838:
1831:
1825:
1824:
1821:
1820:
1818:
1817:
1811:
1805:
1799:
1794:
1789:
1783:
1781:
1773:
1772:
1770:
1769:
1763:
1757:
1752:
1747:
1742:
1737:
1732:
1727:
1722:
1716:
1714:
1710:
1709:
1707:
1706:
1701:
1696:
1691:
1685:
1683:
1679:
1678:
1676:
1675:
1670:
1665:
1660:
1655:
1650:
1645:
1640:
1635:
1630:
1625:
1620:
1615:
1610:
1605:
1600:
1595:
1590:
1585:
1580:
1574:
1572:
1568:
1567:
1565:
1564:
1559:
1554:
1549:
1544:
1539:
1534:
1529:
1524:
1519:
1514:
1509:
1504:
1499:
1493:
1487:
1480:
1478:
1469:
1459:
1458:
1451:
1450:
1443:
1436:
1428:
1419:
1418:
1416:
1415:
1410:
1405:
1400:
1395:
1390:
1384:
1382:
1378:
1377:
1375:
1374:
1369:
1363:
1361:
1357:
1356:
1353:
1352:
1350:
1349:
1344:
1339:
1334:
1329:
1324:
1319:
1314:
1309:
1304:
1299:
1294:
1289:
1283:
1281:
1277:
1276:
1274:
1273:
1268:
1263:
1258:
1253:
1248:
1243:
1237:
1235:
1228:
1224:
1223:
1221:
1220:
1215:
1210:
1205:
1200:
1195:
1189:
1187:
1186:Supercomputers
1183:
1182:
1180:
1179:
1174:
1169:
1164:
1163:
1162:
1151:
1149:
1145:
1144:
1137:
1136:
1129:
1122:
1114:
1108:
1107:
1097:
1088:
1079:
1070:
1065:
1056:
1051:
1044:
1043:External links
1041:
1039:
1038:
1027:
1023:New York Times
1014:
993:
982:
970:
955:
943:
933:. pp. A01
917:
901:
885:
870:
850:
839:
823:
811:
796:
784:
772:
757:
732:
723:
712:
696:
684:
665:
653:
641:
629:
617:
604:
602:
599:
598:
597:
592:
587:
582:
575:
572:
546:
543:
538:
535:
522:
519:
500:
499:
498:
497:
496:
495:
476:
475:
474:
473:
469:
458:
457:
456:
455:
444:
441:
430:
429:
405:
402:
400:
397:
374:
373:
367:
361:
356:
269:
266:
245:
244:
241:
238:
235:
232:
229:
228:
227:
224:
221:
218:
215:
209:
205:
194:
193:
192:
189:
186:
183:
180:
161:
158:
154:plutonium pits
81:high explosive
55:
52:
15:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
2361:
2350:
2347:
2345:
2342:
2340:
2337:
2336:
2334:
2319:
2316:
2314:
2311:
2309:
2306:
2305:
2303:
2299:
2293:
2290:
2288:
2285:
2283:
2280:
2278:
2275:
2273:
2270:
2268:
2265:
2264:
2262:
2258:
2247:
2244:
2241:
2238:
2237:
2235:
2231:
2224:
2221:
2219:
2216:
2214:
2211:
2209:
2206:
2204:
2201:
2200:
2198:
2194:
2191:
2189:
2183:
2173:
2170:
2167:
2164:
2162:
2159:
2157:
2154:
2152:
2149:
2147:
2144:
2142:
2139:
2137:
2134:
2132:
2129:
2127:
2124:
2122:
2119:
2117:
2114:
2112:
2109:
2107:
2104:
2102:
2099:
2097:
2094:
2092:
2089:
2087:
2084:
2082:
2079:
2077:
2074:
2072:
2069:
2067:
2064:
2062:
2059:
2057:
2054:
2052:
2049:
2047:
2044:
2042:
2039:
2037:
2034:
2032:
2029:
2027:
2024:
2022:
2019:
2017:
2014:
2012:
2009:
2007:
2004:
2002:
1999:
1997:
1994:
1992:
1989:
1987:
1984:
1982:
1979:
1977:
1974:
1972:
1969:
1968:
1966:
1962:
1956:
1953:
1952:
1950:
1946:
1940:
1937:
1935:
1932:
1930:
1927:
1925:
1922:
1920:
1917:
1915:
1912:
1910:
1907:
1905:
1902:
1900:
1897:
1895:
1892:
1890:
1887:
1885:
1882:
1880:
1877:
1875:
1872:
1870:
1867:
1865:
1862:
1860:
1857:
1855:
1852:
1850:
1847:
1845:
1842:
1841:
1839:
1837:Gravity bombs
1835:
1832:
1830:
1829:Thermonuclear
1826:
1815:
1812:
1809:
1806:
1803:
1800:
1798:
1795:
1793:
1790:
1788:
1785:
1784:
1782:
1780:
1774:
1767:
1764:
1761:
1758:
1756:
1753:
1751:
1748:
1746:
1743:
1741:
1738:
1736:
1733:
1731:
1728:
1726:
1723:
1721:
1718:
1717:
1715:
1711:
1705:
1702:
1700:
1697:
1695:
1692:
1690:
1687:
1686:
1684:
1680:
1674:
1671:
1669:
1666:
1664:
1661:
1659:
1656:
1654:
1651:
1649:
1646:
1644:
1641:
1639:
1636:
1634:
1631:
1629:
1626:
1624:
1621:
1619:
1616:
1614:
1611:
1609:
1606:
1604:
1601:
1599:
1596:
1594:
1591:
1589:
1586:
1584:
1581:
1579:
1576:
1575:
1573:
1569:
1563:
1560:
1558:
1555:
1553:
1550:
1548:
1545:
1543:
1540:
1538:
1535:
1533:
1530:
1528:
1525:
1523:
1520:
1518:
1515:
1513:
1510:
1508:
1505:
1503:
1500:
1497:
1494:
1491:
1488:
1485:
1482:
1481:
1479:
1477:
1476:Gravity bombs
1473:
1470:
1468:
1460:
1456:
1449:
1444:
1442:
1437:
1435:
1430:
1429:
1426:
1414:
1411:
1409:
1406:
1404:
1401:
1399:
1396:
1394:
1391:
1389:
1388:IBM Blue Gene
1386:
1385:
1383:
1379:
1373:
1372:Edward Teller
1370:
1368:
1365:
1364:
1362:
1358:
1348:
1345:
1343:
1340:
1338:
1335:
1333:
1330:
1328:
1325:
1323:
1320:
1318:
1315:
1313:
1310:
1308:
1305:
1303:
1300:
1298:
1295:
1293:
1290:
1288:
1285:
1284:
1282:
1278:
1272:
1269:
1267:
1264:
1262:
1259:
1257:
1254:
1252:
1249:
1247:
1244:
1242:
1239:
1238:
1236:
1232:
1229:
1225:
1219:
1216:
1214:
1211:
1209:
1206:
1204:
1201:
1199:
1196:
1194:
1191:
1190:
1188:
1184:
1178:
1175:
1173:
1170:
1168:
1165:
1161:
1158:
1157:
1156:
1153:
1152:
1150:
1146:
1142:
1135:
1130:
1128:
1123:
1121:
1116:
1115:
1112:
1105:
1101:
1098:
1096:
1092:
1089:
1086:
1083:
1080:
1078:
1074:
1071:
1069:
1066:
1064:
1060:
1057:
1055:
1052:
1050:
1047:
1046:
1036:
1031:
1024:
1018:
1007:
1000:
998:
991:
986:
979:
974:
967:
962:
960:
952:
947:
932:
928:
921:
914:
910:
905:
898:
894:
889:
883:
879:
878:Allbombs.html
874:
866:
865:
860:
854:
848:
843:
836:
832:
827:
820:
815:
808:
803:
801:
793:
788:
781:
776:
769:
764:
762:
743:
736:
727:
721:
716:
709:
705:
700:
694:
688:
682:
678:
674:
669:
662:
657:
650:
645:
638:
633:
626:
621:
614:
609:
605:
596:
593:
591:
588:
586:
583:
581:
578:
577:
571:
569:
565:
559:
557:
553:
542:
534:
532:
528:
518:
516:
511:
508:
504:
492:
491:
490:
489:
488:
487:
486:
484:
479:
470:
468:
465:
464:
463:
462:
461:
452:
451:
450:
449:
448:
440:
438:
433:
426:
425:
424:
421:
419:
415:
411:
396:
394:
390:
386:
382:
379:
371:
368:
366:
362:
360:
357:
354:
350:
346:
342:
341:
340:
338:
334:
329:
327:
323:
319:
315:
311:
306:
302:
297:
295:
289:
287:
279:
274:
265:
263:
259:
255:
249:
242:
239:
236:
233:
230:
225:
222:
219:
216:
213:
212:
210:
206:
203:
199:
195:
190:
187:
184:
181:
178:
177:
175:
174:
173:
170:
166:
157:
155:
151:
147:
143:
139:
135:
130:
128:
124:
120:
116:
112:
108:
103:
101:
97:
92:
90:
86:
82:
76:
73:
69:
65:
61:
51:
49:
44:
42:
38:
34:
33:United States
30:
26:
22:
2301:Experimental
2165:
1306:
1103:
1049:Pit Lifetime
1030:
1022:
1017:
985:
973:
946:
935:. Retrieved
930:
920:
904:
888:
873:
862:
853:
842:
830:
826:
814:
787:
775:
749:. Retrieved
735:
726:
715:
699:
687:
668:
656:
644:
632:
620:
608:
560:
556:James Goodby
552:Sidney Drell
548:
540:
524:
512:
509:
505:
501:
485:phases are:
480:
477:
466:
460:And (pp 94)
459:
446:
436:
434:
431:
422:
407:
375:
330:
325:
321:
317:
298:
290:
283:
250:
246:
171:
167:
163:
136:used in the
131:
113:material as
104:
93:
77:
68:Soviet Union
57:
45:
24:
20:
18:
1948:Depth bombs
1682:Depth bombs
568:North Korea
428:terrorists.
105:The use of
58:During the
2333:Categories
1484:Little Boy
1465:(including
1413:Z-Division
1203:ASCI White
1193:ASC Purple
1148:Facilities
937:2006-05-03
751:2006-05-03
601:References
335:(840
254:Little Boy
252:bomb (aka
54:Background
2233:Artillery
2188:radiation
1779:munitions
1713:Artillery
1256:Long path
378:beryllium
256:) to the
119:plutonium
107:beryllium
66:with the
2318:RACER IV
2292:Starling
2196:Warheads
2186:Enhanced
1964:Warheads
1571:Warheads
1498:(Mark 3)
1492:(Mark 2)
1490:Thin Man
1486:(Mark 1)
1467:boosted)
1227:Products
1061:page at
677:Archived
574:See also
389:hohlraum
318:Phase 2A
314:vanadium
96:PBX 9502
85:PBX 9404
60:Cold War
2313:Sausage
2287:Kinglet
1899:Mark 39
1894:Mark 36
1884:Mark 27
1879:Mark 26
1874:Mark 24
1864:Mark 21
1859:Mark 17
1849:Mark 15
1844:Mark 14
1787:XM1 ADM
1689:Mark 90
1552:Mark 20
1547:Mark 18
1542:Mark 13
1537:Mark 12
1532:Mark 11
1527:Mark 10
1496:Fat Man
1463:Fission
1381:Related
1266:Novette
1246:Cyclops
1213:Sequoia
1208:Peloton
895:at the
580:Fogbank
399:History
363:Type D
322:Phase 3
208:(3.1.3)
160:Concept
2308:Gadget
2282:Tsetse
2277:Python
1816:(TADM)
1810:(SADM)
1804:(MADM)
1792:T2 ADM
1699:Mk 105
1694:Mk 101
1557:Mk 105
1522:Mark 8
1517:Mark 7
1512:Mark 6
1507:Mark 5
1502:Mark 4
1360:People
1347:Yorick
1280:Others
1234:Lasers
1218:Sierra
1104:Nature
2267:Robin
2168:(RRW)
2011:XW-46
1991:XW-35
1668:W76-2
1653:XW-51
1317:SCALD
1297:LX-14
1271:Shiva
1251:Janus
1241:Argus
1009:(PDF)
833:, in
745:(PDF)
704:JASON
391:(see
150:JASON
142:aging
138:cores
100:LX-17
89:LX-09
2272:Swan
1986:TX29
1914:TX46
1869:TX22
1854:TX16
1322:Silo
1312:ROSE
1287:Gist
1261:Nova
566:and
564:Iran
537:2009
525:The
521:2008
443:2007
416:and
404:2006
349:TATB
276:The
200:and
198:TATB
125:and
87:and
19:The
2246:W82
2240:W79
2223:W70
2218:W66
2213:W65
2208:W64
2203:W63
2172:W93
2161:W91
2156:W89
2151:W88
2146:W87
2141:W86
2136:W85
2131:W84
2126:W80
2121:W78
2116:W76
2111:W73
2106:W71
2101:W70
2096:W69
2091:W68
2086:W67
2081:W64
2076:W63
2071:W62
2066:W61
2061:W60
2056:W59
2051:W58
2046:W56
2041:W55
2036:W53
2031:W52
2026:W50
2021:W49
2016:W47
2006:W41
2001:W39
1996:W38
1981:W28
1976:W27
1971:W15
1955:B90
1939:B90
1934:B83
1929:B77
1924:B61
1919:B53
1909:B43
1904:B41
1889:B28
1766:W82
1760:W79
1755:W75
1750:W74
1745:W54
1740:W48
1735:W33
1730:W23
1725:W19
1704:B57
1673:W81
1663:W72
1658:W54
1648:W45
1643:W44
1638:W42
1633:W40
1628:W37
1623:W34
1618:W31
1613:W30
1608:W25
1603:W13
1598:W12
1562:B57
1342:W71
1337:W70
1332:W47
1075:by
395:).
385:pit
326:W89
310:W68
305:W88
301:W89
278:W89
258:W91
25:RRW
2335::
2248:-0
2242:-0
2225:-3
1797:T4
1768:-1
1762:-1
1720:W9
1593:W8
1588:W7
1583:W5
1578:W4
996:^
958:^
929:.
861:.
799:^
760:^
337:TJ
98:,
1447:e
1440:t
1433:v
1133:e
1126:t
1119:v
940:.
867:.
754:.
710:.
355:)
23:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.