Re: Now on topic previously was Re: [OT]Nukes... tunnels....boom....

Derek Fulton wrote:

> At 08:05  11/03/02 -0600, Allan wrote:
> >What I find sad is that the flame war pretty much killed what could
have been
> >a really interesting thread. How do you handle small, limited nukes
in DS2 and
> >SG2? Yes, SG2... for, as Tom will point out in the Traveller
universe, there
> >were ways of defending against nukes that closed within SG2 range. I
think
> >"pocket nukes" (as opposed to backpack nukes) or nuclear grenades
could be an
> >interesting addition to the DS2 and SG2 arsenals.
> >
> >Maybe we can save the thread and talk about a game role for nuclear
weapons,
> >assuming a technology that allows you to make a very tiny nuke that
explodes
> >with, say, the force of a large artillery shell.
>
> But just how small can a tiny nuke be? I can vaguely remember a
similar
> thread a few years back during which some people discussed just this.
They
> pointed out that there is a minimum size a nuclear warhead, can anyone
> clarify this or is it going to easier to use normal explosives if that
> really tiny nuke doesn't really make that big an explosion?

This actually depends, strongly, on the technology available.  If you
have
something like a stasis field that is impervious and totally reflective
to
neutrons, you can get the five milligrams of Pu to totally fission.