YIKES An ATOMIC BOMB The Size Of A Back Pack Did Exist.

[TheMastersNemesis]

I was watching a documentary about the history of the Navy SEALS that is really fascinating. During the 1960's the SEALS were being trained in the process of how to install an atomic bomb the size of a back pack weighing 56 pounds. They showed film of them putting them on the battlefield or underwater and parachuting out of aircraft with the device strapped to their belly.

The bomb was considered a tactical nuclear device able to clear and entire battlefield or destroy a city. And the bomb was as powerful as the Hiroshima bomb cut down to the size of a soccer ball. Now such a device may to exist today. One thing though the MIRVED bombs in our missiles are probably smaller with much greater yield.

[Wounded Bear]

1. In the 50's...

they experimented with an atomic cannon shell to be fired from a howitzer. Since an artillery round can be fired with accuracy for nearly 20 miles, it was considered a viable "tactical nuclear weapon."

[TheMastersNemesis]

2. I Have Watched That Video. I Remember News Feeds About It When I Was A Child.

I will be 73 soon. And I remember so much about that era and all the atomic tests. I remember Kennedy and the early days of trying to get a SALT treaty. I am sure we have such weapons now but they are secret.

[FreakinDJ]

3. You just now finding out

like the previous poster expressed - since the 50s

Our MIC has no limits on the insanity they'll sell the defense dept.

[TheMastersNemesis]

4. I Have Always Been Aware Of The Size Of These Bombs.

I have always been aware that devices were small. I wonder how many Americans are really aware of how small and portable these devices really and actually are. I do not run into many people who really understand the science of quantum mechanics and why these devices work the way they do.

What I was commenting on was that we had programs for Navy SEALS and other operatives to place devices by hand. The credible threat of terrorists obtaining one of these devices is more possible than we might want to know. And Trump says its ok for nuclear devices expanding to other countries.

To think that the critical mass of some tactical nuclear weapons like would be in a artillery shell are probably not much bigger than a marble. How big he critical masses are and what their formula is is top secret. How many tons of Uranium does to make a critical mass.

[FreakinDJ]

8. Just a matter of time

[kebob]

5. It Gets Scarier

I mean, what do you think that thing on Trump's head is?

[NickB79]

6. Look up the 'Davy Crockett': it was a man-portable nuclear bazooka!

http://foxtrotalpha.jalopnik.com/this-is-what-it-looks-like-when-the-worlds-smallest-nuk-1684923814

[Abnredleg]

7. The US fielded 155mm nuclear shells

The W48 was 6.1 inches in diameter and weighed ~120 pounds. Had a yield of .072 kilotons, which was equivalent to 72 tons of TNT. Small for a nuke but much more powerful than an HE shell.

[LongTomH]

9. W-54 Special Atomic Demolition Munition

The closest thing to a 'suitcase nuke' the US produced. The W-54 had a yield between 10 tons and 1 kiloton of TNT.

[dumbcat]

10. My college roommate had those

After graduation in 1970 he went into the Corps of Engineers and became the OIC of a nuclear demolition platoon. He had a bunch of the W-54's to play with. He was supposed to nuke certain bridges and road junctions in the Fulda Gap.