Here is a website that calculates the values for you.
http://www.stardestroyer.net/Empire/Science/Nuke.html
2006-08-09 06:11:30
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
0⤋
It depends on the size of the device and the altitude at which it exploded. They are different sizes, you know.!
The bomb that destroyed Hiroshima was about 15 Kilo Tons (15 thousand tons of TNT) which exploded over the city center at an altitude of, I think, 3000 feet... and it destroyed the entire city.
On the other hand, there are small, battlefield tactical weapons with 1 Kiloton or less yield that would barely wipe out a square mile.
The largest nuclear weapon that I know of which was actually exploded was the 100 Megaton super bomb that the USSR set off in the late 1960's.
During the 3 years I was working on the Nevada Test Site, from 1961 thru 1963, I was part of 43 events and witnessed the above ground shots from the top of Smokey Junior or Smokey Senior which are above the forward area CP and located in the middle, about 5 miles from both Frenchman Flats and Yucca Flats and the only incident I had was the first time I saw one and nobody warned me to roll the windows down in my truck so the windows blew out when the shock wave hit me.
2006-08-09 06:10:54
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
The blast won't kill you but radiation from the fallout probably will.
The bomb dropped on Hiroshima was approximately 1.3Ktons. It leveled a 1 mile radius. It was not a very efficient bomb as only about 1.4 percent of it's material fissioning.
I'm sure the new generation of nuke bombs are much more efficient and much more powerful. Still the blast probably would not be deadly at an 80 mile distance.
2006-08-09 06:15:59
·
answer #3
·
answered by eddie 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
The blast will not kill you 80 miles from ground zero. The biggest blast zone would be about a 15 mile radius, and that's about a 40 megaton device. That being said, I still wouldn't want to be within 80 miles.
2006-08-09 06:12:14
·
answer #4
·
answered by loon_mallet_wielder 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
This is one of those times that size matters. You need to know the size of the bomb in megatons to determine the dangerous zone, but I think it's safe to assume that within 80 miles of a nuclear blast you are in some danger no matter what.
2006-08-09 06:10:32
·
answer #5
·
answered by ginabgood1 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
Depends on the size of the bomb..
I doubt if any nuclear bomb would kill from a distance of 80 miles.
You might be killed by downwind radiation at 80 miles if you
did not leave the area...
2006-08-09 06:10:07
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
The largest nuke is somewhere around 55megatons.
and I don't think one has ever been used, the crater if I remember correctly was estimated to be
5 miles across and a 1/4 mile deep.
I would think that 80 miles away you might be temporarily blinded by the flash but would not feel
the explosion other than the ground might shake a bit and dishes and stuff would rattle on the walls.
However radioactive fallout would still be a problem if the winds and weather carried it your way.
2006-08-09 06:13:01
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Depends on size. A Hiroshima-type tactical weapon (10-20 kiloton) would not cause any blast damage anywhere near 80 miles away.
I think a 20 Megaton "city-buster" weapon could cause blast damage that far away.
And of course there's the radiation, and there are other effects.
Here's a link I just found:
http://www.nukefix.org/link.html
2006-08-09 06:08:56
·
answer #8
·
answered by American citizen and taxpayer 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
no not at 80 miles, not from the blast anyway. Perhaps from radiation if you were to stay there for some length of time.
I'd love to see one go off. I know call me wierd, but it would be so cool. As in a test, not on a city.
2006-08-09 06:12:09
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
It greatly depends on the size of the bomb. But if you're going to be that close, you'd best run toward the epicenter because the slow death you'd have from the radiation would be much worse than being vaporized all at once.
2006-08-09 06:13:49
·
answer #10
·
answered by darkdiva 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
There is direct and indirect destruction involved. Direct as mentions is related to the size of the explosion (size of the bomb).
Indirect is a function of both size and time. Example: as the radioactive material gets into the water table, it will disperse to a larger area and effect migratory animals and plants, which will continue to spread over time.
2006-08-09 06:12:39
·
answer #11
·
answered by jb_cpq 2
·
0⤊
0⤋