Whatever happened to the Neutron Bomb (ERW) anyway?

[miguelencanarias]

Those of you my age or older will remember that in the late 70s and early 80s there was a lot of talk about a new weapon called ERW (Enhanced Radiation Weapon) a.k.a. The Neutron Bomb, which basically projected a large ammount of radiation while keeping the blast of a nuclear device at a minimum. In other words, it killed people while leaving objects intact.

Whatever happened to that thing? Was it ever produced? There was a lot of noise about its deployment in Europe. Was it a big misinformation operation against the Russians?

[a_very_ex_STAB]

Those of you my age or older will remember that in the late 70s and early 80s there was a lot of talk about a new weapon called ERW (Enhanced Radiation Weapon) a.k.a. The Neutron Bomb, which basically projected a large ammount of radiation while keeping the blast of a nuclear device at a minimum. In other words, it killed people while leaving objects intact.

Whatever happened to that thing? Was it ever produced? There was a lot of noise about its deployment in Europe. Was it a big misinformation operation against the Russians?

Yeah I remember all the fuss about that in the late 70s too. Wonder what happened to it.

[martinexsquaddie]

no point to it any more no russian tank hordes anymore not sure if it wouldhaveever really worked any way

[Lazy Lob]

Those wacky years. From what I remember when I was a lad and doing lab experiments with those freaky particles we were shown that neutrons were easily blocked with water or paraffin wax. Sometimes the interaction of neutrons with the wax created ionizing radiation which in a wax covered tank could easily be stopped by the armour.

Apparently the blast was not that small and structures would be damaged. To get the best use of these devices you would need several at the same time. Also the components had a very short half-life, so neutron bombs could not be stored and ready for use. So it’s basically a weapon with severe tactical limitations except that if it’s used the other side may decide to reply with a bigger yield “conventional” nuclear device. MAD.

To get the best out of one of these devices it would have to be used away from structures. Structures would absorb all the neutrons and would not remain “radioactive”. Humidity and water vapour in the atmosphere also absorb neutrons, so do trees, shrubs etc. So why use a neutron bomb on troops out in the open?

[Kingswat]

Watched a documentary on it a few months ago and said that the project was canceled in 1994.


pretty cool idea though as it was designed for use on massive formations of tanks so that the tanks could be captured and used after a few days.

[QRO?]

Nuclear Weapons Archive (http://nuclearweaponarchive.org/Nwfaq/Nfaq1.html#nfaq1.5):


The U.S. developed and produced three neutron warheads, a fourth was cancelled prior to production. All have been retired and dismantled.

* The W66 warhead for the Sprint missile was the first ER warhead to be developed. It was manufactured during 1974-75, and was retired in Aug. 1975 after only a few months of service when the Sprint system was deactivated (about 70 were made). It had a yield of several kilotons (20 kt has been reported) and may or may not have used D-T fuel.
* The W70 Mod 3 warhead for the Lance missile had a total yield about 1 kt which was 60% fusion and 40% fission. It was manufactured during 1981-83, and was retired by 1992; 380 were built.
* The W79 Mod 0 warhead for the 8 inch artillery shell had a variable yield from 100 T to 1.1 kt. At the lowest yield it was a pure fission weapon, at the highest yield 800 T was from fusion (73%) and 300 T from fission. It was manufactured during 1981-1986; this version began retirement in the mid-80s, all were retired by 1992; 325 were built.
* The W82 Mod 0 155 mm artillery shell, with variable yields similar tot he W79, was canceled in Oct 1983 without going in to production.

The Soviet Union, China, and France are all known to have developed neutron bomb designs and may have them in service. A number of reports have claimed that Israel has developed neutron bombs which, though they could be valuable on an armor battleground like the Golan Heights, are difficult to develop and require sigificant testing. This makes it unlikely that Israel has in fact acquired them.

[usa320]

seems like in todays wars it would be obsolete. Why kill tank crews and capture their tank when you can just pick off the tank with a maverick....like we would need to capture a crappy T-72 anyway.

[SOG]

if i remember correctly the US is researching a bomb of sorts, sounds similar to the neutron bomb but with less fallout. swear i heard about it here only a year or two ago. cant find the link since all my bookmarks of milphotos thread dont ****ing work anymore. update or some ****.