Alex Wellerstein on Twitter: "There is evidence that the Soviets tested a sub-kilogram device (see "0.8 kg" below). Obviously it is a rather tricky thing to get any yield out of that little mass. https://t.co/BT0M93TgWo British version of W-54 had 4kg of U235+Pu, FWIW.… https://t.co/9uCon7KmIs"

@wellerstein

Historian of science, secrecy, and nuclear weapons. Professor of STS at @FollowStevens. UC Berkeley alum with a Harvard PhD. NUKEMAP creator. Coder and web dev.

Hoboken, NJ / NYC

Joined September 2011

Country	Code	For customers of
United States	40404	(any)
Canada	21212	(any)
United Kingdom	86444	Vodafone, Orange, 3, O2
Brazil	40404	Nextel, TIM
Haiti	40404	Digicel, Voila
Ireland	51210	Vodafone, O2
India	53000	Bharti Airtel, Videocon, Reliance
Indonesia	89887	AXIS, 3, Telkomsel, Indosat, XL Axiata
Italy	4880804	Wind
3424486444	Vodafone
» See SMS short codes for other countries

Martin “Doomsday” Pfeiffer (⧖) ‏ @NuclearAnthro 16 Jun 2018

Report Tweet

How do I know W54 mod 1 is SADM (other than Polmar & Norris 2009)? Because I have access to a museum with one of the casings. reason the mod 1 lacked a trajectory sensing device, presumably, is because it was literally hand fucking delivered so no trajectory to sense.pic.twitter.com/WfkwZi2k2i

2 replies 6 retweets 19 likes

Show this thread

Martin “Doomsday” Pfeiffer (⧖) ‏ @NuclearAnthro 16 Jun 2018

Report Tweet

So, unless somebody coughs up a primary source document saying Davy Crockett had a 10 ton yield version I am now pretty convinced that it wasn’t. W54 mod 2 Davy Crockett was nominal yield 20tons and I will now die on that hill.http://youtu.be/eiM-RzPHyGs

6 replies 4 retweets 15 likes

Show this thread

Stephen Schwartz‏Verified account @AtomicAnalyst Jan 4

Report Tweet

Replying to @NuclearAnthro

As you know, there are few declassified primary source documents that reveal the actual operational yield of our nuclear bombs & warheads. @wellerstein got ahold of the original Army field manual for the Davy Crockett, which _may_ shed some light on this.http://blog.nuclearsecrecy.com/2012/07/20/king-of-the-wild-frontier/ …

2 replies 1 retweet 7 likes

Stephen Schwartz‏Verified account @AtomicAnalyst Jan 4

Report Tweet

Replying to @AtomicAnalyst @NuclearAnthro @wellerstein

FWIW, this declassified official Army history of the management of the Davy Crockett program states definitively that in 1957, the Army Chief of Ordnance sought development of a delivery system capable of propelling a warhead with a yield as low as .01 kt. https://apps.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a470429.pdf …pic.twitter.com/W3xDnuiWZs

1 reply 0 retweets 4 likes

Stephen Schwartz‏Verified account @AtomicAnalyst Jan 4

Report Tweet

Replying to @AtomicAnalyst @NuclearAnthro @wellerstein

Note that per this history, the AEC had already developed what became the W54, so the Army was designing the Davy Crockett _around_ it. At least a few of the documents in the footnotes, if FOIA-able, might answer your question once and for all.

1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes

Martin “Doomsday” Pfeiffer (⧖) ‏ @NuclearAnthro Jan 4

Report Tweet

Replying to @AtomicAnalyst @wellerstein

I think I’m going to try and get a couple yields per se declassed.

3 replies 0 retweets 3 likes

Stephen Schwartz‏Verified account @AtomicAnalyst Jan 4

Report Tweet

Replying to @NuclearAnthro @wellerstein

Given the ongoing effort to develop new, low-yield warheads, that could be useful and timely. Unfortunately, I can see DOD and DOE using that fact to justify continuing to keep them secret.

2 replies 0 retweets 4 likes

Steve Weintz‏ @Moe_Delaun Jan 4

Report Tweet

Replying to @AtomicAnalyst @NuclearAnthro @wellerstein

Did Ted Taylor have a hand in the W54, & do you think its design influenced the design of Project Orion propellant charges? Don't recall any mention in George Dyson's book. I think Taylor joined the project in 1958.

2 replies 0 retweets 1 like

Alex Wellerstein‏Verified account @wellerstein Jan 4

Report Tweet

Replying to @Moe_Delaun @AtomicAnalyst @NuclearAnthro

Taylor is credited for the W54, yes, and he himself says the idea of small fission weapons was useful in Orion. But I don't think the W-54 was itself used in Orion in any way, just the experience of it. This is from G. Dyson:pic.twitter.com/fOASOu9KRm

3 replies 1 retweet 10 likes

Cheryl Rofer‏ @CherylRofer Jan 4

Report Tweet

Replying to @wellerstein @Moe_Delaun and

I tend to take physicists talking in public like this with a grain of salt.

3 replies 1 retweet 8 likes

Alex Wellerstein‏Verified account @wellerstein Jan 5

Report Tweet

Replying to @CherylRofer @Moe_Delaun and

There is evidence that the Soviets tested a sub-kilogram device (see "0.8 kg" below). Obviously it is a rather tricky thing to get any yield out of that little mass. http://russianforces.org/blog/2012/10/interesting_document_on_soviet.shtml … British version of W-54 had 4kg of U235+Pu, FWIW.

5:20 AM - 5 Jan 2019

2 Retweets
3 Likes

0 replies 2 retweets 3 likes

Loading seems to be taking a while.

Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.

Tweets

Alex WellersteinVerified account

@wellerstein

Tweets

Loading seems to be taking a while.

false

Saved searches

Tweets

Alex WellersteinVerified account

@wellerstein

Tweets

Go to a person's profile

Saved searches

Promote this Tweet

Block

Tweet with a location

Your lists

Create a new list

Copy link to Tweet

Embed this Tweet

Embed this Video

Preview

Why you're seeing this ad

Log in to Twitter

Sign up for Twitter

Not on Twitter? Sign up, tune into the things you care about, and get updates as they happen.

Two-way (sending and receiving) short codes:

Confirmation

Welcome home!

Tweets not working for you?

Say a lot with a little

Spread the word

Join the conversation

Learn the latest

Get more of what you love

Find what's happening

Never miss a Moment

Loading seems to be taking a while.

Promoted Tweet

false