The B-61 nuclear weapon, a plain old gravity bomb, entered service in the early 1970's. A large number (hundreds for sure, perhaps thousands, its classified) were built and are still in service. B-61 featured "dial-a-yield" by which the bomb can be adjusted from city-smashing size down to a nuclear cherry bomb.
Although it has never been used in action, some forty years in service ought to indicate that it is fairly satisfactory, and they are all built and paid for.
In Washington there is a move afoot to spend another $10 billion dollars on the B-61's. The Air Force wants to add a guidance system to improve accuracy. We really need that. These are nukes, with a total destruction radius measured in miles. Get the bomb with a mile or so of the aim point, and that target is vaporized. World War II mechanical bomb sights were good enough for that.
Then they want to "consolidate" the various flavors of the B-61. Naturally over a production run of forty years, changes were introduced, and the experts recognize half a dozen varients of the B-61. Money would be spent to make them all the same. Not a bad idea mind you, but hardly necessary.
Anyhow they want to spent $10 billion on modifications to a perfectly serviceable weapon. Sounds like a good place to do a little sequestration.
3 comments:
Nuclear weapons, and in particular fusion warheads, aren't like other systems. They age and require refurbishment, particularly the deuterium and/or tritium that is the 'H" in 'H-Bomb'. Both isotopes degrade with time and must be replaced, otherwise the it becomes less of a fusion bomb and more of a fission bomb. (The fission bomb actually initiates the fusion reaction that increases the bomb's yield by an order of magnitude or two...or three.)
Surprisingly, this article in Aviation Week didn't mention the tritium problem at all. Our only tritium producing reactor was shut down some years ago. Tritium has a half life of 12 and a fraction years. That means after 12 years sitting in the storage site, the bomb has lost half its tritium to radioactive decay. This probably ain't good for reliability or yield of the bomb. Aviation Week only talked about expensive redesign of the bomb itself, not tritium replenishment. Don't ask me why.
One other thing - I can see the wisdom of being able to turn the B-61 into a PGM. Since it is at present a straight-forward gravity bomb, the aircraft carrying it has to fly over the target in order to drop it. That leaves the aircraft and crew vulnerable to enemy fire. Using a PGM the aircraft can drop the bomb a lot farther out and can avoid overflying the target.
Post a Comment