This is the video about how ICBM works. ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE--FfwskkeoX8.html This is the video about how Atomic Bomb Fat Man works. ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-cYY5XAMRpkI.html This is the video about how Atomic Bomb Little Boy works. ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-k-u3q1KpAKs.html This is the video about how Anti-Intercontinental Ballistic Missile works. ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE--4Ey6loUwiI.html This is the video about how Supersonic Missile works. ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-s8GvUje-DH8.html
The Tsar Bomba was a three-stage hydrogen bomb with a Trutnev-Babaev second and third stage design. A three-stage hydrogen bomb uses a fission-type atomic bomb as the first stage to compress the thermonuclear second stage. The energy produced from this explosion is then directed to compress the much larger thermonuclear third stage. There is evidence that Tsar Bomba utilized several third stages.
>> There is evidence that Tsar Bomba utilized several third stages I have only seen Carry Sublette's hypothesis but no evidence. Have you seen it ? Can you share the evidence ?
´vvörx without ihvvent höriZönn v?v 4:30 üh öh doublink v??v these things (esp? hbs?) are still ´´clässiFy€D xxxD i doubt there was matter and vaccum witch would need antigravity - antiinertia to stabilice... and ´in moment of detonation fuel is injecktät xP ??? anyhöw they gäve new mattering? cönZeptce v v tängey -:-
It wasn't a two stage weapon. Explosive lenses aren't portrayed accurately, and probably weren't used in the Tsar Bomba. The tamper and the shield are different structures. The secondary fusion fuel is not a tritide. No hard evidence of polystyrene ever being used as an interstage material. Fission chain reactions don't start because of heat. The secondary fission product atoms are not the same. The boost gas is injected prior to primary implosion. The interstage plasma pressure is only a few percent of the total pressure acting on the secondary. It's mostly due to ablation.
At 4:30-4:35, you say that, following entry of the neutron into Pu-239 or U-235, "two more of the SAME ATOMS are generated," implying that the splitting of a Pu-239 results in two Pu-239 atoms and three neutrons. This is NOT correct. Two NEW LIGHTER atoms, not two of the SAME atoms, are generated. For example, the fission of a U-235 atom results in a pair of lighter atoms (most likely Krypton and Barium)...not two U-235 atoms.
"Let's assume the bum has already been released from the bummer". I can't help but hear the words "bum" and "bummer" every time he says bomb and bomber, which is rather interesting. I'm not knocking the narrator because his English is far superior to my second language. Well...I don't even have a second language, so definitely not criticising. It's just funny hearing him talk about bums and bummers, is all. 😂
I still think that nuclear fission reaction is real and can be applied in warfare but regarding Hydrogen-bomb I do have doubts as humans are unable of carrying out controlled nuclear fusion reaction so far and what they claim about this two stage fission/fusion reaction in thermonuclear bomb looks more like a hoax.
Supposedly, the Tzar Bomba had 3 separate fusion chambers, one behind the other. This was meant to intensify the hydrogen fusion yield. It wss originally designed to be a 100 mt bomb, but the technichians wisely decided to use LEAD to contain the lithium deuteride of the third flask to limit the yield to only about 50 mt. This is the only reason that the TU-95 bomber crew were able to escape certain death by incineration.
One correction. The Plutonium spark plug doesn't start with the heat. It starts with the burst of neutrons from the primary stage. The first stage heat from the outside and the second stage from the Plutonium spark plug is what compresses the hydrogen/ lithium atoms to start the second stage fusion.
Yup the spark plug rod can be made of either HEU or Pu239. It is usually encased in thin beryllium at the center of the secondary subassembly. It works by the outer DU casing (called the pusher and tamper) fissioning from the fast neutrons from the primary. This energy compresses the LiD fusion mix to extreme temperatures as the Li in it soaks up neutrons forming tritium. Next, the neutrons make it to the beryllium cladding in the middie where the neutrons get amplified by the metal undergoing a fisioning process of its own. Each neutron becomes 2. This triggers the spark plug to promptly fission and this energy heats the DT soup to fusion temperatures. This reaction generates a lot more neutrons that cause the remains of the pusher, tamper, and even the bomb casing itself to fission.
Atomic bomb trigger is shown being the same as 1940’s Fat Man with obsolete central ball core. By 1961 the Soviets might have moved up to what the US started in the 1950’s - sealed pits that resembled hollow spheres lined with plutonium.
As callen8000 already mentioned below, the statement "two more of the same atoms are generated" is completely wrong and shows that the person who created this video doesn't understands basics of fission. After seeing such a major error, it's hard to take the whole video seriously.
@@aleroj15 Dummies will stay forever dummies if you give them wrong information. Your comment would be justified if I complained that a more detailed explanation was necessary. But I only insisted that (few) things said were all correct.
У меня очень большие сомнения, в том, что такова конструкция у Царь-бомбы. Во-первых, иностранцы не могут знать, как она устроена, они могут лишь предполагать. Во-вторых, то, что я увидел на видео, очень сильно смахивает на американские устройства, взорванные на испытаниях Кастл Браво и Кастл Ромео; а вот их конструкция как раз-таки секретом не является, не известны лишь геометрические размеры и параметры учавствующих компонентов. Из этого я делаю вывод - автор подогнал конструкцию американских бомб под советское название и дал ей общеизвестные размеры и вес.
however, if you saw Trinity and Beyond, you could see the inside of the Tsar bomb and the actual inside is not quite the same as this diagram is showing.
Um, no. First, there's no lithium deuteride tritide, as there's no need for tritium if you have lithium, which happily fissions into tritium. Second, Tsar Bomba was a three stage weapon. It used a dual primary fission triggering detonation and given its size, likely a cryogenic tritium and deuterium gas secondary. The US didn't start using lithium deuteride until 1954 in testing, production always lagging behind. The finalmost stage was left out, as the final 100 megaton design was fission, triggered by the neutrons from the hydrogen fusion and being insanely dirty, was left off. Oh, a bit of trivia, Tsar Bomba was detonated a week before I was born.
@@JohnSmith-fg6pt doesn't really scale well though. The fireball basically nearly was above the atmosphere, where it'd have no real effect. That diminishes the shockwave and thermal effect front tremendously. So, bang for buck, 50 MT is about as big as can be and remain effective.
You don't NEED to compress it equally, you just need to make sure it compresses sufficiently. Chemical explosives just don't work fast enough to compress as much as is needed if the detonation is uneven as material will "leak" out through the holes in the detonation sphere as if they were a gun barrel instead of continuing to compress. The pressure and heat from the fission are several orders of magnitude higher and can mostly bypass that problem. The force and pressure are applied faster than the material can be pushed out of the way, even when it has plenty of directions to go.
@@Quickcat21MK It's literally compression, nothing to do with the energy state of the matter. Density is what sets the reaction off. When the nuclei fission they generate a few neutrons that are capable of fissioning more nuclei. The material needs to be dense enough that the neutrons generated by one fission event generate more than one fission event elsewhere in the warhead before escaping to create the exponentially scaling chain reaction that makes the explosion. When you compress everything, the nuclei being closer together decreases the probability that a neutron will escape the core without hitting another fissile nucleus. From ~0.95 to a value greater than 1, starting the chain reaction.
The plutonium sphere has to be compressed equally because a sphere will tend to pancake when it is asymmetrically squashed. The second stage is a fusion reaction in a product that does not have a critical mass like plutonium, therefore it is not squashed but instead bombarded by x rays which force the fusion fuel to become so dense it overcomes electrostatic repulsion and the atoms nuclei touch each other at high temperature and pressure causing fusion. It is an entirely different mechanism causing fission by lowering the critical mass, than that of causing fusion via high pressure and temperature.
It was supposed to be a 100 megatonne bo.b. butbhalfway through they tested only 50 Megatonne. Damage and potential problems they halfed everything and it was Insane.
tow stage were by each 1st staged caused the super compression of the 2nd stage. 234 neutrons per square micro cm. Based on Childs toy of gun powder between tow bolts in a nut.
According to Einstein there is 16PT joules in kilogram matter. Roughly 20Mt. Modern nukes efficiency is 10-15Kt per kg.A lot of room for improvement :)
You can see a declassified video that shows the guts of it. It has 6 thermonuclear primary modules inside of 9Mt a piece. The tertiary stage would have been a cylinder of DU filled with lithium deuteride and a rod of HEU or plutonium. This assembly is rougly the size of a 100 gallon propane tank in the middle of the device. Also the bombs casing was originally to be made of DU around the 6 primary subassemblies but they decided on lead to keep the device at 50kt and to keep the same throw weight. Had they went all in, the device would have made well over 120Mt, 50Mt from the primaries, 50Mt from the tertiary, and 20 to 30Mt from the casing.😮
I’ve seen some videos of scientist working on the czar bomb with Russia laboratories, and surprisingly the bomb looks very empty. It only has pods of unknown material visible. In the structure.
The explanation at 4:35 is incorrect. The atoms from fission are not the same. They can be two of several combinations, each with different half-lifes, and emitting different radiation as they decay into other atoms.
Wait the weight shouldnt matter. They would have needed a parashoot no matter what. Once something weighs a certain amount doesnt how much more it weighs it cant fall faster
I think that Man has created his own end…we are the guardians of this planet NOT the Gods….it isn’t OUR planet to destroy…thank you for sharing #Peace #Hope 🌍🕊️🙏
At 4:31: "two more of the same atoms are generated..." Not true. Fission of a heavy nucleus literally splits the nucleus apart, into two daughter nucleii which have atomic numbers roughly half that of the parent nucleus. These are also called fission products.
Its interior probably does not look like this because it is not a two-stage bomb (the video is wrong there), it is a three-stage bomb. Moreover, even the two-stage bombs don't look like this as what all videos on the subject show is the principle, not the actual 'blueprint'. The actual bluprint is classivied and we can only guess what it might look like. In short, this video does not teach us much about thermonuclear weapons, but it demonstrates how youtube works: anybody who has mastered some basic CGI graphics becomes an expert on everything.
Your describing a Teller designed bomb. The Soviet bomb was a fission bomb surrounded by alternating layers of plutonium and lithium dueteride. Andrei Sakharov called it a layer cake device.
@@krokohui Используя чередующиеся слои, содержащие соединение дейтерия и уран-238, Сахаров концептуализировал дизайн Сахаров назвал "Слойку" по лучевой ионизационной компрессии дуэтида лития и урана 238!
The pit, or core of the bomb in an implosion style device is never going to be made of U235. To produce U235 is extremely labour intensive, and is only attempted by countries that do not have nuclear reactors that can produce plutonium. The USA's electrical power grid devoted 10% of it's annual output to refining the Uranium used for the Hiroshima bomb, which is an astronomical amount in my opinion. Also a uranium core has to be far larger than a plutonium core, and would have to undergo greater compression to trigger it into a supercritical state. I'm not even sure if it would be efficient enough to react sufficiently before the weapon blew itself apart. Uranium U235 bombs tend to be of the gun type such as Little Boy. There are so many more points I have to make but for brevity, Tsar Bomba was a multi-stage fission fusion fission fusion fission type weapon in all probability - 5 stages, using Plutonium core, Uranium tamper, Lithium Deuteride and Tritium, with a Polonium 210 and Beryllium neutron generator. It is quite remarkable that the USSR was able to fit this into a deliverable package. They were far ahead of the USA in that respect. The Castle Bravo bomb that the USA built could not be delivered and was built into a 5 storey building on an island - completely undeliverable.
Ivy Mike was not a transportable device, Castle Bravo was weaponized almost as tested as the Mk-17/23 and carried by the Convair B-36, the only USAF craft capable of that at the time. Also the USSR produced more weapons grade Uranium than the USA, more than 130 metric tons.
Hopefully I don’t sound stupid here but what happens if only the primary exploded? Would the bomb itself not explode and remain intact? Or would it explode still just with like 1/3 of the power it could have had?
This is called "fizzle". The "Castle Koon" shoot of Operation Castle - Bikini Atol; was a example of "fizzle", of the expected a yield of 1 Mt, result only 110 Kt, the secondary stage don't ignite, due design error. Other is the "Ruth " test, the result explosion was smaller and are not able even to destroy completely the 61 meters tower wheres the bomb sit.
The bomb had a parachute, and was dropped as the plane was climbing to give it sort of a "toss" so the plane would have more time to clear the blast radius, even then they told the crew it was a coin toss whether or not they'd make it. Edit: Also, besides having to be modified to carry the bomb, the plane was given special paint to help mitigate the thermal radiation it would absorb.
The Tsar Bomba is a 3-stage device, however, only 2 stages were used in the detonation, the US also designed a 3 stage device, but never detonated one.
Sakharov (Soviet daddy for the nuclear projects) wanted to plant those around US as a deterrent, but Soviet generals called him a psycho, since the idea was total madness and would wipe out civilian population in a potential conflict. Cold War generals had some dignity, because they saw the horrors of WW2 by their own eyes.
Yes, the people who were killed by the nuclear bombs in Japan did not die in vain. The Cuban missile crises may have been completely different. They must never be forgotten.
Although it may be inaccurate in some places, this is an excellent simple explanation of how this thermonuclear device worked. More needs to be declassified to get a more accurate picture. Hopefully, you'll update this video when new details are made available.
No matter how many components you can get to make a thermonuclear device (not many), you still need highly enriched plutonium or uranimun. Try and get some ... idiot.
3:09 the weigh has nothing to do with the speed the bomb falls. All bodies fall at the same speed, despite matter their masses. The parechute is becaus the sphere of damage is too big, so they slow down the bomb.
That's only true in a vacuum. In atmosphere, an object will accelerate until it reaches its terminal velocity, which is when the aerodynamic drag force is equal to the object's weight (its mass times the acceleration of gravity).
Your description is of a “Teller” design of a hydrogen bomb. The Soviets used a “layer cake” design with alternating layers of deuterium and uranium 238.
Just a heads-up, everything discussed in this video is a speculation. Even design of the shell of the Tsar bomb is still classified, let alone design of the bomb itself. There's a Russian RU-vid channel called Radiation Hazard that has a video about this bomb, but the supposed design of the bomb is different. The cyllindric design of the second stage is characteristic to American bombs, whereas Russians have always preferred spheres instead. The Tsar bomb might have had several such spheres as second stage.
“Because of its heavy weight, a parachute was attached” all objects fall at the same rate regardless of mass, you might wanna double check your basic physics.
Let me be perfectly honest with you all. We all want to be so grateful that they just made a 50-mega ton yield weapon and that much only gave the pilots a 50/50 chance of survival. That’s great, and hey, I’m glad they made it out alive. But, question! Why didn’t they just build the freakin bomb on the ground. I know, I know, they wanted to produce the biggest fireball the galaxy has ever seen. But couldn’t they just light one off on the ground for starters? I’m sure the fireball isn’t going to disappoint in any case. Why the hell did they insist they had to fly this device and then make a mad dash to get the hell away from it?
The vaporized earth from a ground burst of this magnitude could have produced enough fallout to destroy much of life on the northern hemisphere. Certainly local fallout would have killed everything for thousands of miles downwind !
The animations of fission at 02:05 and 04:15 are incorrect. Fission is the splitting of a nucleus into several smaller nuclei, but your animation shows it splitting into 2 nuclei that are just as large as the original.
Do those electrical impulses have to reach their termini at the same time and if so, does that mean that the ones closer to the source have to be timed more slowly so they go off at the same time as the further ones? Cool!
Yes, that first walk over is just about right. The chemistry is a heuristic model. Avocado, avagadro, whatever. There are ten elements famously unstable in certain states of matter. Ammonium nitrate crystal is one good example.
I really want to know what would happen if the bomb took 1 minute to detonate instead of 600 billionths of 1 second? If the heat that it produced (100 million degrees) lasted more than it did, would there be even more fire damage caused from the explosion? Because I can imagine if that heat and radiation was emitted for 1 whole minute it would have that much more time to fry everything that it did for about 59 more seconds than it did in less than 1 second. I hope someone can answer this for me!
I dont know about how it works with Nuclear devices, but I'm guessing that it will always be an instantaneous explosion lasting millionths of a second when the bomb is first detonated, but the actual fireball will last longer the bigger the yield is , because it causes a bigger explosion? just like say, if you set a small amount of petrol on fire, it goes off instantly, but only lasts a short time, because of the small amount of fuel, but say, 50 litres, will go off just as quickly, but burn longer because of the larger amount of fuel. I'm not sure. maybe someone else will know more.
Unfortunately, There are a couple of myths that this video repeats unknowingly, spreading the false knowledge. Those are: 1) The thermonuclear reactions of deuterium are misunderstood which leads to (2). 2) The true purpose of the sparkplug is misunderstood and misreported. 3) The true purpose of the polystyrene (or other filler) is misunderstood and misreported. 4) The fusor neutron source is omitted from the story. 5) The first stage charge shown is optimized for standalone use and not optimized for the role of the primary. Hydrogen bomb would use lighter and weaker primary, with less tamper. 6) The role of slow high explosive in the implosion system is misreported. 7) The mean free path of the fast neutrons is greatly exaggerated. 8) Thermonuclear burn in compressed LiD is a millimeter thin surface (radiation dominated shock) not the volumetric burn at least initially. 9) Nuclear fission doesn't care about heat in zeroes approximation and in first approximation it is negatively impacted by heat if you analyze disassembly. 10) The shape of the bomb suggests that the main stage was spherical and placed at the middle of the bomb housing to utilize the width. Carey Sublette's Nuclear Weapon Archive can be consulted for the details, in particular chapter 4. nuclearweaponarchive.org/Nwfaq/Nfaq4.html
Impractical for effective delivery. May have been a beast, and it would have been even more a beast had it not been nerfed, but its physical dimensions and weight were so unwieldy there isn't even today an ICBM with engines capable of delivering it. At leas as we know. I seen to have read somewhere that *unofficially* even the Russians at the times agreed on the fact it was built for propaganda, a show of muscles that had no practical use. Or maybe a study on how to built more powerful bombs... that produced a veritable monster under all aspects. Too big, too heavy, too cumbersome. Of course we know a bomber could be, and was, used to deliver it, but any known bomber capable of carrying it would be shot down WAY before it reached its intended target.
Why is the 2H and 3H injected from an external reservoir in the primary? Is there even enough time for the gas to travel through the lines into the hollow pit if it happens simultaneously to the explosion of the fast explosive? I think TSAR used the primary to ignite a secondary small fusion reaction in at least 2 nuclear bombs opposite of each other with the large third stage in between these two to focus the energy.
I still think that nuclear fission reaction is real and can be applied in warfare but regarding Hydrogen-bomb I do have doubts as humans are unable of carrying out controlled nuclear fusion reaction so far and what they claim about this two stage fission/fusion reaction in thermonuclear bomb appears to be a hoax.
@@tratzum Nor do you say no in Putin's Russia. I asked, though, since the bomber shown in the video was a big turbo prop one (which is probably what was needed for such a heavy payload), but such a plane would take about an hour to get 700K from the drop-side, and I don't think that bomb would take even close to that much time to get down to 4000meters (or was it feet?) above ground, no matter how big the parachutes. Or am I missing something, here?
@BorisNoiseChannel I don't remember the details. Read about some time ago. The pilots and plane did make it home I think they lost control and altitude
Distance, and doppler effect saved the plane from being destroyed by the air blast. Still, the aerodynamic lift force was temporarily disrupted, which caused the plane to dive involuntarily.
Am I Understanding right that the casing around the whole bomb is strong enough to hold the initial fission reaction and create the pressure needed for the fusion? Or is it just that the energy being given off all around the second stage causes the compression? Just trying to understand how the pressure is being held long enough for the fusion stage?
Inertial confinement. The bomb components cannot overcome their inertia and disassemble before the reaction goes to completion in a few 10's of nanoseconds.
I still think that nuclear fission reaction is real and can be applied in warfare but regarding Hydrogen-bomb I do have doubts as humans are unable of carrying out controlled nuclear fusion reaction so far and what they claim about this two stage fission/fusion reaction in thermonuclear bomb appears to be a hoax.
Uhhh..'scuse me: "This weapon was used by the Soviet Union in the Second World War"...?? Recheck that. As for comparing to Fat Man, that is a disproportionate comparison. Fat Man was one of the first and oldest nuclear-weapon designs, relatively crude and very inefficient (only 13% of the plutonium fuel for that bomb actually underwent fission); on a side note, geography played a major role in the limited destructive radius; Nagasaki is built on a series of hills, which served as deflective berms the day of the bombing, thus explaining why only 39% of the city was destroyed. The Fat Man design was discontinued as obsolete before the 1940s came to a close. Tsar Bomba on the other hand was one of the latest, most advanced nuclear-weapon designs entering the 1960s, a good 15+ years after World War II ended. Only in overall casing sizes may that comparison have some relevance, showing how much nuclear technology advanced in leaps and bounds. After all, on a side note, we managed to shrink the 10,000-lb. Little Boy bomb which needed a B-29 to deliver, into a 800-lb. artillery shell deliverable by a cannon. Same core detonation design, *and* same yield...but in a smaller package. At first I was concerned that even more errors in technical history were being touted, particularly regarding the material used in the tamper of the tested weapon. But, they did make a clarification in the last minute or so of the video that the tamper was changed to lead, which dropped the design yield by 50% but in turn made it still relatively safe for northern Europe and the most-inhabited sections of Russia. Had they stuck to the original specs, the Cold War may have ended by Russia's self-destruction....and taking two thirds of Europe with it. As for being a weapon of war, it never would have been practical. The size and mass of that bomb made it impossible for the Soviets to deliver; the plane that dropped it was heavily modified because the standard-service Tu-95s would have collapsed on themselves a payload the mass of that bomb. On top of that, the mods done to the drop-plane cut its range drastically, as fuel cells in the wings had to be taken out, making it impossible for that plane to even reach the then-border of NATO unless it took off from East Berlin. On the other hand, as a scientific experiment, that bomb was the most impressive ever made, as it was the cleanest-ever nuclear weapon detonated, with a 97.5% fusion-powered yield. This was a *true* hydrogen bomb.
@@MeBallerman It was monitored by the Soviets when it happened, reviewed, documented, and verified. I was just as surprised to learn they built the truest hydrogen bomb ever.
Uncle Sam.......having the honourable distinction to be the only nation to have used nuclear weapons on civilian targets ; no matter how hard the Japan military regime was presumed to have asked for it . (They were ready to throw in the towel but like any vanquished opponent tried for a less harsh unconditional surrender , but the U.S. wouldn't pass on showing Stalin what it was capable of).....With "God's Blessings" not to forget......... Currently we live in more dangerous times than ever during the cold war. Since the U.S. sees fit to humiliate a nuclear power like the Russian Federation by ever expanding eastwards, which has no value at all for the safety of the U.S. The possibility for a nuclear accident has never been greater due to almost mutual hatred by the two opponents. While Nato nations stumble behind the Washington state department and her expansionist think tanks.
@@ByronScottJones Yep...how would people dare to ask questions, let's take a one way ticket to the Chinese Communist Party,...despite the phony anti China rhetoric still Washington's best pal.
Great video but the bomb dimensions are way off. It was just under 7ft in diameter but in your video it looks like it is about 11ft when compared to the size of the 6ft man standing next to it.
