On Dec 9, 4:01 pm, Ian Jelf wrote:
I doubt that you could get a nuclear
bomb into a briefcase either.

If indeed inaccurate, I for one am mightily relieved.

Unfortunately not.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special...ition_Munition

B2003

wrote in message

On Dec 9, 4:01 pm, Ian Jelf wrote:
I doubt that you could get a nuclear
bomb into a briefcase either.

If indeed inaccurate, I for one am mightily relieved.

Unfortunately not.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special...ition_Munition


Did you actually see the programme? In it, the nuclear bomb was
apparently squeezed into a fairly ordinary looking leather briefcase,
casually carried by someone purporting to be just another commuter. It
certainly didn't weigh 68kg, nor was it the size of a large backpack.
So my statement stands.

On Dec 9, 5:14 pm, "Recliner" wrote:
Did you actually see the programme? In it, the nuclear bomb was
apparently squeezed into a fairly ordinary looking leather briefcase,
casually carried by someone purporting to be just another commuter. It
certainly didn't weigh 68kg, nor was it the size of a large backpack.
So my statement stands.

Right, because a commuter carrying an explosive backpack on the tube
would immediately be clocked as suspicious.
Anyway , that was 30 years ago - who knows what classified munitions
they have now that could fit in a suitcase.

B2003

wrote in message

On Dec 9, 5:14 pm, "Recliner" wrote:
Did you actually see the programme? In it, the nuclear bomb was
apparently squeezed into a fairly ordinary looking leather briefcase,
casually carried by someone purporting to be just another commuter.
It certainly didn't weigh 68kg, nor was it the size of a large
backpack. So my statement stands.

Right, because a commuter carrying an explosive backpack on the tube
would immediately be clocked as suspicious.
Anyway , that was 30 years ago - who knows what classified munitions
they have now that could fit in a suitcase.

In the Spooks story, this was an old Russian (pretending to be American)
bomb, placed with a sleeper. And it was in a briefcase, not a suitcase.

I suspect that there's only so far you can miniaturise a nuclear bomb.
You need a certain mass of the fissile material (presumably enriched
uranium), plus various other essential components, including shielding
and conventional explosives. The only thing that may have got smaller in
recent years is the electronics, if any.

"Recliner" wrote in
:

wrote in message

On Dec 9, 5:14 pm, "Recliner" wrote:
Did you actually see the programme? In it, the nuclear bomb was
apparently squeezed into a fairly ordinary looking leather briefcase,
casually carried by someone purporting to be just another commuter.
It certainly didn't weigh 68kg, nor was it the size of a large
backpack. So my statement stands.

Right, because a commuter carrying an explosive backpack on the tube
would immediately be clocked as suspicious.
Anyway , that was 30 years ago - who knows what classified munitions
they have now that could fit in a suitcase.

In the Spooks story, this was an old Russian (pretending to be American)
bomb, placed with a sleeper. And it was in a briefcase, not a suitcase.

I suspect that there's only so far you can miniaturise a nuclear bomb.
You need a certain mass of the fissile material (presumably enriched
uranium), plus various other essential components, including shielding
and conventional explosives. The only thing that may have got smaller in
recent years is the electronics, if any.



But have a look at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critical_mass and you will
see that there are some isotopes that have a critical mass that could very
definitely fit into a briefcase. Hopefully these isotopes are not available
in Woolworths.

But have a look athttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critical_massand you will
see that there are some isotopes that have a critical mass that could very
definitely fit into a briefcase. Hopefully these isotopes are not available
in Woolworths.

And if they are, they won't be much longer.

But you can probably get 50% off at the moment ;-)

On Dec 10, 9:42 am, Phil C wrote:
But have a look athttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critical_massandyou will
see that there are some isotopes that have a critical mass that could very
definitely fit into a briefcase. Hopefully these isotopes are not available
in Woolworths.

And if they are, they won't be much longer.

But you can probably get 50% off at the moment ;-)

You could call it a mass reduction.

*cough*

B2003

In message , at 21:17:33 on
Tue, 9 Dec 2008, Recliner remarked:
In the Spooks story, this was an old Russian (pretending to be American)
bomb, placed with a sleeper. And it was in a briefcase, not a suitcase.

I suspect that there's only so far you can miniaturise a nuclear bomb.
You need a certain mass of the fissile material (presumably enriched
uranium), plus various other essential components, including shielding
and conventional explosives.

The "Uranium" part seemed to be inside a stainless steel globe the size
of a tennis ball.

The only thing that may have got smaller in recent years is the
electronics, if any.

And possibly the battery - it seemed fully charged even after being
buried for 20 years.
--
Roland Perry

"Roland Perry" wrote in message
...
In message , at 21:17:33 on Tue,
9 Dec 2008, Recliner remarked:
In the Spooks story, this was an old Russian (pretending to be American)
bomb, placed with a sleeper. And it was in a briefcase, not a suitcase.

I suspect that there's only so far you can miniaturise a nuclear bomb.
You need a certain mass of the fissile material (presumably enriched
uranium), plus various other essential components, including shielding
and conventional explosives.

The "Uranium" part seemed to be inside a stainless steel globe the size of
a tennis ball.

The only thing that may have got smaller in recent years is the
electronics, if any.

And possibly the battery - it seemed fully charged even after being buried
for 20 years.
--
Roland Perry

I was a bit surprised that, after quite a big bang (happily without the
fallout), London Bridge station was carrying on as usual - there was even a
bloke sweeping the floor in the background. Otherwise a wholly realistic,
almost documentary feel to the programme!

MaxB

On Dec 10, 10:09 am, "Batman55" wrote:
I was a bit surprised that, after quite a big bang (happily without the
fallout), London Bridge station was carrying on as usual - there was even a
bloke sweeping the floor in the background. Otherwise a wholly realistic,
almost documentary feel to the programme!

Indeed. It was also interesting to see the inside of the FSB london HQ
with its panoramic windows opening out onto city airport giving anyone
outside full view of whats going on, not to mention the free reign its
agents have to wander around london shooting and sniping at people
without being spotted by a single plod (who were no doubt too busy
nicking congestion charge dodgers).

B2003