"Terry W. Colvin" forwarded:
> > I am only amazed that a terrorist group has not yet used this method!
> The problem is that you don't know exactly WHERE your buoy is going.
Not to come down on either side of the buoy-bomb, but a terrorist might not
be too picky.
>The second problem is that spy satellites can pretty easily spot weapons
>sized lumps of radioactive materials unless kept in a hefty lead
>containment system.
Totally, absolutely untrue. Satellites are more that 100 km from the
ground, the air provides the same amount of shielding as 10 meters of
water -- if the bomb is underwater, that just adds more shielding -- and
bombs aren't all that radioactive to begin with.
>Then you've also got the sonar nets that girdle the
>US. Anything that is metallic and is below the surface gets tracked when
>it comes within a certain range.
Again, untrue. The SOSUS arrays listen for noise generated by submarines and
ships. The only way the proposed constant-depth drifter buoy would be
detected is by a ship's active sonar, and, AFAIK, those are infrequently
used. Or a hapless submarine might chance to bump into it, I suppose.
-----------------
Allen Thomson wrote:
>The second problem is that spy satellites can pretty easily spot weapons
>sized lumps of radioactive materials unless kept in a hefty lead
>containment system.
Totally, absolutely untrue. Satellites are more that 100 km from the
ground, the air provides the same amount of shielding as 10 meters of
water -- if the bomb is underwater, that just adds more shielding -- and
bombs aren't all that radioactive to begin with.
But it's just around the corner. It's been in development for the past
decade or more.
Testing was done with the ALEXIS and FORTE sats and CALIPOE systems to develop
multi-spectral thermal imaging for the detection of nuclear materials for arms
proliferation uses. 3 or 4 years ago they were able to detect radioactive dust
in processing plants. And that's just the non-secret stuff. Although I still
think detection of a bomb will be a few years off, it will happen soon. there
are already "sniffers" in Washington, the Panama Canal and other places and
once they have detection down with sattelites (if we don't already), next step
will be tracking of materials, then bombs.
>Then you've also got the sonar nets that girdle the
>US. Anything that is metallic and is below the surface gets tracked when
>it comes within a certain range.
Again, untrue. The SOSUS arrays listen for noise generated by submarines and
ships. The only way the proposed constant-depth drifter buoy would be
detected is by a ship's active sonar, and, AFAIK, those are infrequently
used. Or a hapless submarine might chance to bump into it, I suppose.
Given a million to one odds, they could be detected by magnetic anomoly
detectors in a ship or helicopter, but only by chance and even if so, they
probably wouldn't think a thing about it. About the same odds of a sub bumping
into it unless, of course, they were looking for it and knew where to look.
--------------
UFO said
>But it's just around the corner. It's been in development for the past
>decade or more.
If, as I think, we're talking about detecting the radiation given off by a
nuclear bomb before it explodes, we'll never, ever have the capability of
doing that from space, simply because there's nothing to detect outside the
atmosphere if the bomb is on the ground. It's that 10-meters of water
equivalent screening, plus the low radioactivity of bombs that gets you. The
100+ km stand-off range doesn't help either.
>Testing was done with the ALEXIS and FORTE sats and CALIPOE systems to
develop >multi-spectral thermal imaging for the detection of nuclear
materials for arms proliferation >uses. 3 or 4 years ago they were able to
detect radioactive dust in processing plants. And >that's just the
non-secret stuff. Although I still think detection of a bomb will be a few
years >off, it will happen soon. there are already "sniffers" in Washington,
the Panama Canal and >other places and once they have detection down with
sattelites (if we don't already), next >step will be tracking of materials,
then bombs.
Forte and Alexis are helping to develop new techniques applicable to the
detection of nuclear explosions, a different and generally easier task than
we're talking about. See < http://www.fas.org/irp/news/1997/forte_pr.htm >.
CALIOPE is indeed intended for remote chemical diagnostics to help detect
and diagnose WMD production and possibly storage facilities. But it has no
application in finding an assembled nuclear weapon.
I try to avoid being dogmatic about such things, but it's appropriate in
this case: *There is no known physical principle that would allow the
radiation from an unexploded nuclear weapon on the ground to be detected
above the atmosphere, because the radiation doesn't escape through the
atmosphere.* Now if the weapon possess other signatures, such as being
mounted on an ICBM sitting on a pad, or being in a crate labled "NUCLEAR
BOMB -- USE NO HOOKS," or having a radio transmitter attached to it, then
satellites could help.
BTW, you're right that ground-based or helicopter-mounted radiation
(gamma-neutron) detectors can detect the radiation of a weapon, but
generally only at ranges of a few tens of meters. Back in the mid-1970s
there was a flap when gamma-neutron detectors the US had installed in the
Bosporus registered radioactivity from transiting Russian freighters.
AFAIK, the affair kind of died without resolution.
>Given a million to one odds, they could be detected by magnetic anomoly
detectors in a >ship or helicopter, but only by chance and even if so, they
probably wouldn't think a thing >about it. About the same odds of a sub
bumping into it unless, of course, they were
>looking for it and knew where to look.
Yes, I agree. If some sort of advanced warning were received, ships and
aircraft could be deployed into the anticipated drift path to search with
sonar and MAD and might have a decent chance of finding the infernal buoy.
But if there were no warning, forget it.
--
Terry W. Colvin, Sierra Vista, Arizona (USA)
< fortean1@frontiernet.net >
Home Page: < http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Stargate/8958/index.html >
Sites: Fortean Times * Northwest Mysteries * Mystic's Cyberpage *
TLCB * U.S. Message Text Formatting (USMTF) Program
------------
Member: Thailand-Laos-Cambodia Brotherhood (TLCB) Mailing List
TLCB Web Site: < http://www.tlc-brotherhood.org >[Allies, CIA/NSA,
and Vietnam veterans welcome]
Southeast Asia (SEA) service:
Vietnam - Theater Telecommunications Center/HHC, 1st Aviation Brigade
(Jan 71 - Aug 72)
Thailand/Laos
- Telecommunications Center/U.S. Army Support Thailand
(USARSUPTHAI), Camp Samae San (Jan 73 - Aug 73)
- Special Security/Strategic Communications - Thailand
(STRATCOM - Thailand), Phu Mu (Pig Mountain) Signal Site
(Aug 73 - Jan 74)
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Jul 27 2000 - 14:13:33 MDT