backtop


Print E-mail del.icio.us 47 comment(s) - last by tunatofu.. on Mar 25 at 12:15 PM

Crude schematic of nuclear bomb doesn't scare scientists, but raises questions on the limits of Wikileaks

Official schematics for a “workable” atomic bomb appeared on Wikileaks last week, purportedly depicting the “Fat Man” weapon detonated over the Japanese city of Nagasaki.

The schematic, a “crude” British description of the famous “Fat Man” device developed at Los Alamos laboratories, was part of the declassified-then-retracted Penney Report, released under the UK Public Records Act.  However, the UK retracted the document from public access in 2002.

Wikileaks claims the medium-quality scan of a 1947 drawing is still a public record. The site notes that despite having its access conditions changed to the custody of the Ministry of Supply, nobody from the government has tried to contact anyone already in possession of the file, known as UK Public Record Office File AVIA 65/1163 “Implosion.”

“It should be observed that Penney's description and discussion of development are no more revealing than descriptions of the United States' first implosion bomb that have been publicly available for many years, and in fact are less precise than other descriptions that are now available,” reads the analysis, which appears to have been originally posted at nucelarweaponsarchive.org. The schematic, part of the 1947 Penney Report compiled by elite British scientist William G. Penney, who served on the Manhattan Project, is described as “the oldest material in the file” and was written “before any actual bomb development work had been undertaken in the UK.”

An original text transcription of the Penney Report depicts a Britain deep in the development of its own nuclear program: a chart in Appendix M classifies bomb development into 11 categories, and it lists only two that Britain could “go straight ahead and make.” Other categories, including the bomb’s Plutonium core and detonation fuse, cite everything from inexperience to difficulty in acquiring materials as bars to progress – all of which seemed to be defeated by 1952, when the UK successfully carried out its “Operation Hurricane” at midnight, October 3.

“This diagram is not really a secret to foreign intelligence services,” reads the WikiLeaks analysis, “nobody is going to be surprised by this design, just by the fact that it’s appeared in public.”

“Open sources have speculated on these matters for a long time (see Nuclear Weapons Design article in Wikipedia), and this just confirms that they were right,” it adds.

It appears that Wikileaks is comfortable posting the plans: “The real problem about building one of these designs is the rarity … of plutonium and polonium, as well as the ability to fabricate sophisticated high explosives to exacting specifications,” it says. “We’re not talking about IEDs here: to build a nuclear weapon requires a state.”

As worrisome as the phrase "leaked nuclear bomb schematics" sounds, there is little harm in the one posted on Wikileaks.  At least, there's nothing in the schematic that isn't discussed in high school physics classes across the world.

But Wikileaks stirs up another question in its most recent leak controversy.  Last month Wikileaks unveiled a series of documents implicating the Julius Baer Group of fraud.  While the bank was universally blasted for attempting to get these documents removed from Wikileaks, the jury is still out on how the public will accept leaked nuclear secrets.



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Eh?
By Fox5 on 3/17/2008 2:23:45 PM , Rating: 3
What's so secret about this? If they were previously declassified, that makes them essentially public domain, does it not? Not sure how they were originally released, but I can't imagine that a google search couldn't have turned these up somewhere on the Internet anyhow. Big hooha over nothing.




RE: Eh?
By James Holden on 3/17/2008 2:26:36 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
If they were previously declassified, that makes them essentially public domain, does it not?

No. Especially since they are classified again.


RE: Eh?
By kontorotsui on 3/17/2008 2:29:08 PM , Rating: 5
quote:
No. Especially since they are classified again.


Ah, you declassify a document so everybody has a copy, THEN you classify it again. Very smart.

/sarcasm


RE: Eh?
By James Holden on 3/17/2008 2:41:51 PM , Rating: 2
Well, it was stupid for them to declassify it in the first place. I'm guessing they declassified it, then realized this doc was in there, and then it was reclassified.

Either way, it's still not public domain as the OP mentioned.


RE: Eh?
By smitty3268 on 3/17/2008 3:49:08 PM , Rating: 2
LOL. They just accidently released it, huh?

No, they released it because they figured it didn't show anything that wasn't practically common sense in the world of nuclear weapons, the kind of stuff any college physics professor could tell you. Then, after 9/11 they got a little paranoid and tried to reclassify a whole bunch of information, including this.


RE: Eh?
By rcc on 3/17/2008 4:33:00 PM , Rating: 1
If it was declassified (by mistake or not) in 2002 it kind of blows that theory out of the water.


RE: Eh?
By smitty3268 on 3/17/2008 5:16:38 PM , Rating: 3
It was RE classified in 2002. Not sure when it was originally released, but a lot of that stuff happened during the 90's.


RE: Eh?
By Nik00117 on 3/17/08, Rating: 0
RE: Eh?
By jlips6 on 3/20/2008 11:36:05 AM , Rating: 2
does anyone remember that boyscout who was rejected from the navy because his radiation levels were too high? He built a atomic bomb out of smoke detectors in his backyard. It would've worked, it just needed another fissile material. If a boyscout can get the materials for an atomic bomb, I don't think that it's all that hard to concieve you don't have to know how an atomic bomb works to get the parts.


RE: Eh?
By masher2 (blog) on 3/20/2008 2:53:22 PM , Rating: 2
> "He built a atomic bomb out of smoke detectors in his backyard. It would've worked, it just needed another fissile material..."

He didn't build an atomic bomb, though he actually did manage to concentrate enough radioactive isotopes in one spot to create a mild radiation hazard.


RE: Eh?
By noxipoo on 3/17/2008 5:43:28 PM , Rating: 4
they leaked it to create hype, ie HL2.


RE: Eh?
By Samus on 3/17/2008 6:01:12 PM , Rating: 2
hahahaha!


RE: Eh?
By eye smite on 3/17/2008 9:01:31 PM , Rating: 3
Ya know, everyone makes mistakes, or were you expecting perfection?


RE: Eh?
By FITCamaro on 3/17/08, Rating: -1
RE: Eh?
By asdf23fvas324rf on 3/17/2008 2:40:27 PM , Rating: 1
the fact that more detailed, useful schematics for newer nuclear weapons are available in other places, not to mention that all that is really required to make one is access to the materials and a degree in nuclear physics. and even then, these are schematics for the old fat man bomb, one which has to be carried by a cargo plane or something similar and then dropped over the target, its unlikely that anything like that would happen for several reasons (one being the fact that it would be easier to just make an icbm or something instead).


RE: Eh?
By Mitch101 on 3/17/2008 2:47:12 PM , Rating: 5
"Sorry but user ID asdf23fvas324rf is already taken"

Fine but you aren't getting the domain

Domain ASDF23FVAS324RF.COM is available!


RE: Eh?
By Darkefire on 3/17/2008 4:45:51 PM , Rating: 2
I remember being able to find fairly detailed schematics available on the 'net back when I was in eighth grade, doing a presentation on the A-bomb. Uranium-based bombs are quite simple to build if you have the right components; the only hard part involved is figuring out the critical mass of uranium needed, and someone with a BS in physics could figure that out. Not to mention that a group with the resources to acquire/enrich uranium would probably just spend the extra 20 grand or so to pick up one of the ex-Soviet nuclear scientists doing freelance work on the black market. An atomic bomb requires considerable care in acquiring components and handling nuclear material, which makes its use limited to mostly governments.

No, what I'm worried about is a terrorist group getting their hands on some uranium/plutonium and using it to build a dirty bomb. Sure, it lacks that earth-scouring pizzazz, but it's both far simpler to build and adds that extra terror flavor of slow radiation death. Something like that is not only imaginable, thanks to Russia's outstanding work in keeping track of all their nuclear material, but could be a serious threat as soon as some radical group or another works up the balls for it.


RE: Eh?
By eye smite on 3/17/2008 9:09:27 PM , Rating: 4
Potassium idodide blocks radiation poisoning. Pick some up at walmart TODAY!!!! lol


RE: Eh?
By Ringold on 3/18/2008 4:47:55 PM , Rating: 2
That only helps reduce the odds of getting thyroid cancer in the long run, and thats it. No replacement for living in a lead house. :)