I have a question about nuclear weapons. Anyone here know much about them?

[happyslug]

78. The "Weapons" can last, but NOT the Uranium or Plutonium in them

One report I read said any nuclear weapon had to have its "Atomic" elements (in that case Hydrogen element of a Hydrogen bomb) replaced at least every four years. The bomb itself is designed to last for DECADES, but that includes the plan to replace its Uranium, Hydrogen and/or Plutonium on a regular basis. The exact schedule is classified, but that is inherent in the design.

Your data reflects the WEAPON itself NOT the nuclear elements. It is like saying an M1 Tank can last for 20-40 years, which is true, but that includes numerous replacements of its tracks, its engine and even it cannon. The same can be said of the M16 rifle. Barrel life of an M16 is about 24,000 rounds. Most M16 in actual combat uses that in about two years (1000 rounds a month for 24 months). Thus the barrel has to be replaced, but the actual rifle can last for decades.

During WWII, the Us had a hard time keeping up is M1 rifle production, with the troops switching to armor piecing rounds in late 1944 onward, almost all of the rifles needed new barrels by the time the German's surrender (One of the reason, the US made a firm decision NOT to go to war with Russia in 1945, was the knowledge that almost every the M1 Rifle in the hand of US Soldiers in Europe needed to be sent home and re-barreled).

The M1 Rifle was used till the 1960s (it was the Rifle carried by the National Guardsmen at Kent State in 1970). The barrel had been replaced many times since it was produced by the time it was replaced by the M16 (Technically the M14 replaced the M1 in 1957, but in most National Guard units it was M16 replacing M1s not M14s). Thus M1 rifles were still in service in 1970 but most had had several barrels over their life time (and many M1s survive to this day, many in civilian hands being fired a lot less then it had been in combat, but the barrels still have to be changed every so often do to the fact the barrel is shot out).

I bring up these other weapons so you understand what you are reading. These are the life expectancy of these weapons NOT the underlying ability of the nuclear parts to go super critical. No one says the M16 is a rifle only good for two to four years, they say it is a rifle good for 20-40 years, even through its barrel has to be replaced every 2-4 years of heavy usage. The M1 Tanks is expected to last for decades, even through most will have their electronics changed in addition to new engines, transmissions and tracks, many of these on a almost yearly basis.

The scientists you are citing, accept the requirement that the nuclear parts of the bomb has to be replaced on a regular basis. In fact most of the Atomic Testing of the 1950s and 1960s (and later) was to see how low the percentage of nuclear elements can go and the bomb still work (most of the underground testing post test ban was on this subject more then how to make a bigger bomb). Most of that knowledge is well known so most testing today is to use that data to give new weapons a longer shelf life between getting new nuclear components.

Just a comment that what I was discussing is like the barrel of an M16, or an Tank Engine, something that has to be replaced every so often to keep the weapon usable. What you are citing assume such replacements take place and they are looking at the life time of the weapons independent of such regular replacements of parts.