• Protip: Profile posts are public! Use Conversations to message other members privately. Everyone can see the content of a profile post.

Look what I saw on the freeway Today

i don't think they'll be transporting something like that in a very expose manner.

it'll be a target for the terrorists..
 
Maybe not a replica but a real empty casing...and a heavy one too judging from how slow the truck was moving up the grade. If it were a replica would it need to be that heavy? Also look how heavy duty the skid it's sitting on is.

Anyway not a bad pic for a "no look" one handed shot...I'm pretty pleased ;)
 
Its pretty impressive in size, yet still looking in an extreme retard era of technology.

I would imagine that todays "Fat Man" if designed today would look different.
 
Re: Fat Boy, not Fat Man

Soichiro said:
Let's keep the correct names on our nukes!

Sitting at my desk, looking at the mini-nuke on my Atomic Museum keychain, the little bomb is clearly emblazoned with the markings "fat man." You are mistaking the two nukes used, the other one being little boy.

http://www.atomicmuseum.com/tour/dd2.cfm

fatman_littleboy.jpg
 
Anybody have a pic of a current nuke? Maybe of a MIRV warhead from an ICBM or a W-8something gravity bomb for comparision. Maybe the 9 megaton warhead from the Titan II?
 
Ponyboy said:
Anybody have a pic of a current nuke? Maybe of a MIRV warhead from an ICBM or a W-8something gravity bomb for comparision. Maybe the 9 megaton warhead from the Titan II?

I thought W-88's were minuteman warheads -- not gravity bombs.

Try these:

N1B83bombs.jpg


The guy sweeping makes it look so safe...

The original caption reads:

"B83 nuclear gravity bombs, each with estimated 1 megaton yield, Barksdale Air Force Base, Louisiana. 1995"






But nothing beats the soviet 100 megaton bomb. It was so large that it had an access hatch that you would climb in to service the bomb... :rolleyes:

tsarbmb.jpg
 
Back
Top