The M29 Davy Crockett
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
What Should Be Done About Tactical Nuclear Weapons?
THE ATLANTIC COUNCIL OF THE UNITED STATES What Should Be Done About Tactical Nuclear Weapons? GEORGE LEWIS & ANDREA GABBITAS WITH ADDITIONAL COMMENTARY BY: EDWARD ROWNY & JOHN WOODWORTH OCCASIONAL PAPER What Should Be Done About Tactical Nuclear Weapons? George Lewis & Andrea Gabbitas With Additional Commentary By: Edward Rowny & John Woodworth MARCH 1999 OCCASIONAL PAPER For further information about the Atlantic Council of the United States and/or its Program on International Security, please call (202) 778-4968. Information on Atlantic Council programs and publications is available on the world wide web at http://www.acus.org Requests or comments may be sent to the Atlantic Council via Internet at [email protected] THE ATLANTIC COUNCIL OF THE UNITED STATES 10TH FLOOR, 910 17TH STREET, N.W. WASHINGTON, D.C. 20006 CONTENTS Foreword by David C. Acheson……..…….………………………………………….…iv Executive Summary………………………………………………………………….. vi Problems of Definition……………………………………………………………. 1 History of Tactical Nuclear Weapons……………..……….………….………….... 4 The Current State of Tactical Nuclear Weapons…………………………….…….. 6 United States………..………………………………………………………... 6 Russia………………………………….…………………………………...… 7 Other Countries……………….………………………………………………8 Recent Discussions and Proposals on TNWs……….………………………….…... 8 Synthesis…………………..……………………………………………….…….. 11 Why Keep TNWs?……………………………………………………..…….. 11 Why Limit TNWs?…………………………………………………………….15 Why Now?……...……………………………………………………………17 A Specific Proposal………………………………………………………………..18 Phase 1.……………………………………………………………………21 Phase -
Heater Element Specifications Bulletin Number 592
Technical Data Heater Element Specifications Bulletin Number 592 Topic Page Description 2 Heater Element Selection Procedure 2 Index to Heater Element Selection Tables 5 Heater Element Selection Tables 6 Additional Resources These documents contain additional information concerning related products from Rockwell Automation. Resource Description Industrial Automation Wiring and Grounding Guidelines, publication 1770-4.1 Provides general guidelines for installing a Rockwell Automation industrial system. Product Certifications website, http://www.ab.com Provides declarations of conformity, certificates, and other certification details. You can view or download publications at http://www.rockwellautomation.com/literature/. To order paper copies of technical documentation, contact your local Allen-Bradley distributor or Rockwell Automation sales representative. For Application on Bulletin 100/500/609/1200 Line Starters Heater Element Specifications Eutectic Alloy Overload Relay Heater Elements Type J — CLASS 10 Type P — CLASS 20 (Bul. 600 ONLY) Type W — CLASS 20 Type WL — CLASS 30 Note: Heater Element Type W/WL does not currently meet the material Type W Heater Elements restrictions related to EU ROHS Description The following is for motors rated for Continuous Duty: For motors with marked service factor of not less than 1.15, or Overload Relay Class Designation motors with a marked temperature rise not over +40 °C United States Industry Standards (NEMA ICS 2 Part 4) designate an (+104 °F), apply application rules 1 through 3. Apply application overload relay by a class number indicating the maximum time in rules 2 and 3 when the temperature difference does not exceed seconds at which it will trip when carrying a current equal to 600 +10 °C (+18 °F). -
Influencer Poll: Likelihood to Recommend & Support
Wave 56 Influencer Poll Update January 2018 Public Release Influencer Poll: Likelihood to Recommend & Support 1 Likelihood to Recommend and Support Military Service Likelihood to Recommend and Support Military Service 80% 71% 70% 71% 70% 66% 66% 66% 67% 63% 63% 63% 64% 61% 63% 60% 50% 46% 47% 47% 45% 44% 42% 43% 42% 39% 38% 40% 35% 32% 33% 34% 34% 30% 20% 10% Likely to Recommend: % Likely/Very Likely Likely to Support: % Agree/Strongly Agree Yearly Quarterly 0% Jan–Mar 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Likely to Recommend Military Service Likely to Support Decision to Join § Influencers’ likelihood to support the decision to join the Military increased significantly from 67% in 2015 to 70% in 2016. § However, Influencers’ likelihood to support the decision to join the Military remained stable in January–March 2017. = Significantly change from previous poll Source: Military Ad Tracking Study (Influencer Market) Wave 56 2 Questions: q1a–c: “Suppose [relation] came to you for advice about various post-high school options. How likely is it that you would recommend joining a Military Service such as the Army, Navy, Marine Corps, Air Force, or Coast Guard?” q2ff: “If [relation] told me they were planning to join the Military, I would support their decision.” Likelihood to Recommend Military Service By Influencer Type Likelihood to Recommend Military Service 80% 70% 63% 59% 59% 60% 58% 60% 57% 56% 57% 55% 54% 53% 48% 55% 50% 54% 47% 52% 51% 44% 51% 47% 42% 42% 42% 49% 41% 43% 42% 45% 45% 46% 40% 42% 37% 41% 39% 41% 38% 38% 38% 37% 37% 39% 34% 35% 34% 30% 33% 33% 32% 33% 32% 31% 32% 31% 31% 31% 32% 20% 25% 25% 24% 31% 29% 10% % Likely/Very Likely Yearly Quarterly 0% Jan–Mar 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Fathers Mothers Grandparents Other Influencers § Influencers’ likelihood to recommend military service remained stable in January–March 2017 for all influencer groups. -
Sgs01fenstermacher.Pdf
- ! ,:. Sciena & Global Security, 1990, Volume I, ppo187-223 Pbotooopying permitt£d by license only Reprints available directly from the publisher C>1990 Gordon and Breach Science Publishers SoA. Printed in the United States of America The Effects of Nuclear Test-ban Regimes on Th ird -generation-wea pon I n novation Dan L. Fenstermache~ The primary reason that we are pursuing nuclear directed energy weapons is to understand the Soviets' capability to design and deploy similar weapons,which would put the US strategic deterrent force or a future defensivesystem at risk. Former US Energy Secretary John S. Herrington' It is by no means certain that a Comprehensive Test Ban would prevent the Soviets from developing a new generation of nuclear weapons, although that would assuredly be the effect of a total testing ban on the US. Former Director of Los Alamos National Laboratory, Donald Kerrt Under the rationale of assessing potential Soviet threats, several third-generation- weapon concepts are being actively studied in the US. This paper presents a technical analysis of the physical principles and likely capabilities of three nuclear directed-energy concepts (x-my lasers, nuclear kinetic-energy weapons, and micro- wave devices) and describes the implications for their development of threshold test bans at thresholds above and below 1 kiloton, Inertial Confinement Fusion, special- ized non-nuclear weapon effects simulation, and seismically quiet containment a. Center for Energy and Environmental Studies. Princeton University. Princeton. NJ 08544 Some of ftJ/s research was undertaken while on feUol,I,Shlpat ftJe Center for Science and International Affairs. Kennedy School of Government. -
The Weird Nukes of Yesteryear
The Cold War produced some oddball weapons. Here are three of them. The “Davy Crockett,” shown here mounted on a tripod at Aberdeen Proving Ground in Maryland, was the smallest nuclear warhead ever developed by the US. The Weird Nukes DOD photo end of a series of thermonuclear bombs initiated in 1950. This followed the Soviet detonation of an atomic bomb of Yesteryear in 1949, several years before Western By Norman Polmar and Robert S. Norris intelligence agencies expected such an event. y the time the Cold War reached some concern about whether they could It was the era of “bigger is better.” its height in the late 1960s, the be carried in aircraft, due to size. The The zenith of “big bombs” would be American nuclear arsenal had “Little Boy” dropped on Hiroshima seen on Oct. 30, 1961, when the Soviet grown to more than 31,000 tipped the scales at 9,700 pounds, and Union detonated (at Novaya Zemlya in Bweapons. The Army, Navy, Air Force, the “Fat Man” dropped on Nagasaki the Arctic) a thermonuclear bomb that and even the Marine Corps worked weighed 10,300 pounds. The immediate produced an explosion equivalent to to acquire weapons for the “nuclear follow-on bombs were about the same 58 megatons—the largest man-made battlefield,” whether in the air, on the size or smaller. explosion ever achieved. Soviet Premier ground, on water, or underwater. However, the development of ther- Nikita Khrushchev would later write Three of the more unusual—and in monuclear or hydrogen bombs led to in his memoirs: “It was colossal, just the end impractical—of these weapons much larger weapons, with the largest incredible! Our experts later explained were the enormous Mk 17 hydrogen US nuclear weapon being the Mk 17 to me that if you took into account the bomb, the Navy’s drone anti-submarine hydrogen bomb. -
Report- Non Strategic Nuclear Weapons
Federation of American Scientists Special Report No 3 May 2012 Non-Strategic Nuclear Weapons By HANS M. KRISTENSEN 1 Non-Strategic Nuclear Weapons May 2012 Non-Strategic Nuclear Weapons By HANS M. KRISTENSEN Federation of American Scientists www.FAS.org 2 Non-Strategic Nuclear Weapons May 2012 Acknowledgments e following people provided valuable input and edits: Katie Colten, Mary-Kate Cunningham, Robert Nurick, Stephen Pifer, Nathan Pollard, and other reviewers who wish to remain anonymous. is report was made possible by generous support from the Ploughshares Fund. Analysis of satellite imagery was done with support from the Carnegie Corporation of New York. Image: personnel of the 31st Fighter Wing at Aviano Air Base in Italy load a B61 nuclear bomb trainer onto a F-16 fighter-bomber (Image: U.S. Air Force). 3 Federation of American Scientists www.FAS.org Non-Strategic Nuclear Weapons May 2012 About FAS Founded in 1945 by many of the scientists who built the first atomic bombs, the Federation of American Scientists (FAS) is devoted to the belief that scientists, engineers, and other technically trained people have the ethical obligation to ensure that the technological fruits of their intellect and labor are applied to the benefit of humankind. e founding mission was to prevent nuclear war. While nuclear security remains a major objective of FAS today, the organization has expanded its critical work to issues at the intersection of science and security. FAS publications are produced to increase the understanding of policymakers, the public, and the press about urgent issues in science and security policy. -
Strategy in the New Era of Tactical Nuclear Weapons
STRATEGIC STUDIES QUARTERLY - PERSPECTIVE Strategy in the New Era of Tactical Nuclear Weapons COL JOSEPH D. BECKER, USA Abstract Post–Cold War strategic discourse, primarily among Russian strate- gists, has challenged the precept that nuclear weapons are not useful tools of warfare or statecraft. To reduce the likelihood that such ideas will ever be tested in practice, the US must openly address hard-case scenarios and develop a coherent strategy sufficient to give adversaries pause. This article posits that the key to successfully deterring the use of tactical nuclear weapons lies not in winning an arms race but in the clear articulation of a purpose and intent that directs all aspects of US policy toward the preven- tion of nuclear war and leaves no exploitable openings for opportunistic challengers. Further, an ideal strategy would be crafted to reduce—not increase—the salience of nuclear weapons in geopolitics. The article con- siders three possible approaches to a strategy for tactical nuclear weapons, but the most desirable and effective will be a “strategy of non-use” based upon credible and well- prepared alternatives to a nuclear response. ***** he end of the Cold War ushered in a new era suggesting the pos- sibility that nuclear weapons could become a relic of the past. Prominent leaders, including US president Barack Obama, cam- paigned vociferously for measures to abolish the world’s nuclear stock- T1 piles. However, instead of moving toward a world of “nuclear zero,” the US and Russia have proceeded with nuclear modernization and capability development, and even China is quietly expanding its nuclear arsenal. -
Nuclear Weapons Databook, Volume I 3 Stockpile
3 Stockpile Chapter Three USNuclear Stockpile This section describes the 24 types of warheads cur- enriched uranium (oralloy) as its nuclear fissile material rently in the U.S. nuclear stockpile. As of 1983, the total and is considered volatile and unsafe. As a result, its number of warheads was an estimated 26,000. They are nuclear materials and fuzes are kept separately from the made in a wide variety of configurations with over 50 artillery projectile. The W33 can be used in two differ- different modifications and yields. The smallest war- ent yield configurations and requires the assembly and head is the man-portable nuclear land mine, known as insertion of distinct "pits" (nuclear materials cores) with the "Special Atomic Demolition Munition" (SADM). the amount of materials determining a "low" or '4high'' The SADM weighs only 58.5 pounds and has an explo- yield. sive yield (W54) equivalent to as little as 10 tons of TNT, In contrast, the newest of the nuclear warheads is the The largest yield is found in the 165 ton TITAN I1 mis- W80,5 a thermonuclear warhead built for the long-range sile, which carries a four ton nuclear warhead (W53) Air-Launched Cruise Missile (ALCM) and first deployed equal in explosive capability to 9 million tons of TNT, in late 1981. The W80 warhead has a yield equivalent to The nuclear weapons stockpile officially includes 200 kilotons of TNT (more than 20 times greater than the only those nuclear missile reentry vehicles, bombs, artil- W33), weighs about the same as the W33, utilizes the lery projectiles, and atomic demolition munitions that same material (oralloy), and, through improvements in are in "active service."l Active service means those electronics such as fuzing and miniaturization, repre- which are in the custody of the Department of Defense sents close to the limits of technology in building a high and considered "war reserve weapons." Excluded are yield, safe, small warhead. -
PC Cake Pump
PC Cake Pump 60 Hz 1339-00 en Installation, Operating and Maintenance Instructions 310190010011 US 03.2020 310190010011 www.sulzer.com 4 Installation, Operating and Maintenance Instructions (Original Instructions) PC Cake Pump PC Cake Pump Table of contents 1. Installation .............................................................................................................................................6 1.1 Installation and safety recommendations ............................................................................................... 6 1.1.1 General ..................................................................................................................................................6 1.1.2 System design & installation .................................................................................................................. 6 1.2 Handling ..................................................................................................................................................6 1.3 Storage and infrequent operation ........................................................................................................... 7 1.3.1 Short term storage ..................................................................................................................................7 1.3.2 Long term storage ...................................................................................................................................7 1.4 Electrical .................................................................................................................................................7 -
Table of Contents
Table of Contents Beds 2 Bars 98 Dressers, Night Stands, Chest 47 Bar Stools 99 Wardrobes 54 Accent Chairs 104 Cabinets, Bookshelves 64 Ottomans 107 Computer Desks 69 Recliners 115 Office Chairs 74 Sofa Sets 116 TV Stands 84 Futons 118 Coffee Tables 90 Kitchen 122 Dinettes 94 Accessories 131 WWW.HODEDAH.COM 1 Ivory Bronze Black • Metal Day Bed HIDB707 • H46.3” W78” D40.5” • Available in Black, Bronze & Ivory WWW.HODEDAH.COM 2 Bronze Black IvoryIvory • Metal Day Bed • H38” W78” D40.5” HIDB808 • Available in Black, Bronze & Ivory WWW.HODEDAH.COM 3 • Metal Day Bed HIDB909 • H37.4” W78” D40.5” • Available in Charcoal, Silver, Black & Ivory Ivory WWW.HODEDAH.COM 4 • Metal Bed Finished in Metallic Silver HI905 • Twin H45.3” W39.5” D78” Silver • Full H45.3” W54.5” D78” • Queen H45.3” W60.5” D83.2” WWW.HODEDAH.COM 5 • Metal Bed Finished in Metallic Charcoal HI910 • Twin H39.4” W39.5” D78” Charcoal • Full H39.4” W54.52” D78” • Queen 39.4” W60.5” D83.2” WWW.HODEDAH.COM 6 • Metal Bed Finished in White HI910 • Twin H39.4” W39.5” D78” White • Full H39.4” W54.52” D78” • Queen 39.4” W60.5” D83.2” WWW.HODEDAH.COM 7 • Metal Bed Finished in Metallic Bronze HI915 • Twin H43.3” W39.5” D78” Bronze • Full H43.3” W54.5” D78” • Queen H43.3” W60.5” D83.2” WWW.HODEDAH.COM 8 • Metal Bed Finished in Metallic Charcoal HI920 • Twin H43.3” W39.5” D78” Charcoal • Full H43.3” W54.5” D78” • Queen H43.3” W60.5” D83.2” WWW.HODEDAH.COM 9 • Metal Bed Finished in Metallic Charcoal HI925 • Twin H39.4” W39.8” D78.7” Charcoal • Full H39.4” W55” D78.7” • Queen H39.4” W60.9” D83.9” -
8:10 PM 5/31/2018 Page 1 Iowa Senior Games - 6/10/2018 Meet Program
Iowa Sports Foundation-WinterIASrGames - Organization License HY-TEK's MM 7.0 - 8:10 PM 5/31/2018 Page 1 Iowa Senior Games - 6/10/2018 Meet Program Heat 3 of 3 Finals Event 1 Mixed 50-99 500 Yard Freestyle 1 Brown, David M72 IADSM Lane Name Age Team Seed Time 2 Utsinger, Don M71 IAURB Heat 1 of 3 Finals 3 Rullan, Ruben M77 IAURB 1 Kealy, Tom M62 IACR 4 Monroe SR, Thomas M78 AZGLD 2 Touchton, Keith M62 IAWDM 5 Maggert, Ivan M78 NELCN 3 Clark, David M61 IABON 6 Johnson, Ruth W85 IADAV 4 Phelps, Robert M61 IACR 5 Kealy, Daniel M60 IADSM Event 4 Mixed 50-99 100 Yard Backstroke Heat 2 of 3 Finals Lane Name Age Team Seed Time 1 Smith, Elizabeth W66 IADSM Heat 1 of 4 Finals 2 Hauber, Cindy W65 IAAME 1 Barger, Joe M52 IACR 3 Burch, Joyce W63 IAPEL 2 Kealy, Daniel M60 IADSM 4 Carr, Theresa W63 IAOTT 3 Happel, Diane W54 IAFTD 5 Kealy, Ann W59 IAMAR 4 Dingeman, Jean W54 IAPEL 6 Dingeman, Jean W54 IAPEL 5 Kealy, Ann W59 IAMAR Heat 3 of 3 Finals Heat 2 of 4 Finals 1 Johnson, Ruth W85 IADAV 1 Kealy, Diane W61 WIHAR 2 Smith, Pat W71 IACR 2 Botts, Dannette W60 IANEW 3 Larsen, Barbara W71 MNROC 3 Burch, Joyce W63 IAPEL 4 Rullan, Ruben M77 IAURB 4 Smith, Elizabeth W66 IADSM 5 Maggert, Ivan M78 NELCN 5 Loring, Karen W68 AZSCW 6 Hauber, Cindy W65 IAAME Event 2 Mixed 50-99 200 Yard IM Heat 3 of 4 Finals Lane Name Age Team Seed Time 1 Smith, Ronald M74 IAWDM Heat 1 of 2 Finals 2 Utsinger, Don M71 IAURB 1 Happel, Diane W54 IAFTD 3 Schenck, Alan M72 IACLR 2 Fisk, Debbie W61 IAWAU 4 Brown, David M72 IADSM 3 Burke, John M57 IAPEL 5 Bower, Norm M65 IADAV 4 Wells, -
1. Nuclear Weapons
1. Nuclear weapons Prepared by the Nuclear Weapons Databook staff, Washington, DC' I. Introduction It is difficult to characterize 1989. It was a year during which the entire foundation of the cold war seemed to crumble and the most fundamental assumptions about East-West relations and military strategy required a complete reappraisal. Even a narrow assessment of the nuclear weapon developments of 1989 must take into account the extraordinary political changes in Eastern Europe, the overwhelming economic and political pressures to reduce military expenditure and forces, and the unprecedented level of co-operation between the USA and the USSR. It appears that these developments may permit a fundamental change in the nuclear postures and practices of the nuclear weapon states. Against this backdrop, future historians may see 1989 as the year in which the post-World War IT era ended and a new era began. Even without this new situation the defence budgets of the five nuclear weapon nations in general and the budgets for nuclear weapons in particular are becoming severely constrained. For the fifth year in a row the US military budget declined, as measured in constant dollars. The Soviet Government stated, and the US Government apparently agrees, that Soviet military spending was less in 1989 than it was in 1988. France is now feel- ing the effect of its economic constraints, especially visible in the nuclear weapon programme. Nevertheless, nuclear weapon modernization continued in all five of the acknowledged nuclear weapon states: the USA, the USSR, the UK, France and China. In the USA there was a decrease in the strategic arsenal because of bomb and submarine retirements.