Nuclear bunker buster bombs.

• Autores: Michael A. Levi
• Localización: Scientific American, ISSN 0036-8733, Vol. 291, Nº. 2, 2004, págs. 66-73
• Idioma: inglés
• Texto completo no disponible (Saber más ...)
• Resumen

  • The article debates the strategic and tactical utility of burrowing nuclear weapons. In the years following Operation Desert Storm and the first Persian Gulf War, U.S. military strategists debated the best way to destroy deeply buried targets and subterranean military facilities. One solution that defense strategists discussed would be to deploy earth-penetrating nuclear warheads with reduced explosive yields. Under the auspices of the Department of Energy's National Nuclear Security Administration, $6.1 million was spent in 2003 for research on a Robust Nuclear Earth Penetrator (RNEP) bomb, followed by another $7.5 million in 2004. To many observers, these substantial spending allocations and this breadth of research suggest that the President George W. Bush administration has already tacitly committed to building RNEPs and is actively considering developing other types of nuclear bombs. The new programs dismay arms control advocates, who argue that the U.S. will squander its leadership in preventing nuclear proliferation and might also provoke other states to pursue similar technologies. Lost in the frenzied debate over RNEPs has been adequate discussion of whether the military advantages of these weapons can offset their political and diplomatic liabilities. The complications from atomic fallout naturally raise the question of whether any nonnuclear alternative could destroy deeply buried bunkers. INSETS: THE PHYSICS OF BOMB PLACEMENT;GROUND-PENETRATING WEAPONS TECHNOLOGY;DEBATING THE BAN ON SMALL NUCLEAR WEAPONS.