this post was submitted on 14 Aug 2024
1 points (100.0% liked)

Ukraine

8068 readers
50 users here now

News and discussion related to Ukraine

*Sympathy for enemy combatants in any form is prohibited.

*No content depicting extreme violence or gore.


Donate to support Ukraine's Defense

Donate to support Humanitarian Aid


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Second sentence in the article clarifies that it wasn't a thermonuclear device.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 month ago (1 children)

still shitty journalism, it's clickbait bullshit

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 month ago (2 children)

I mean....it was a hydrogen bomb. What else you gonna call it?

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 month ago

Personally, I think that "hydrogen bomb" is a worse name for the fission/fusion bomb than for this one. I mean, it is what it is because the name has meant the fission/fusion bomb since it first became a thing, but it was either a bad naming or the name was selected because it was deliberately misleading (cold war and all).

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 month ago

That term almost exclusively refers to thermonuclear weapons.

The amazing Ukrainians created what's basically a fuel-air-bomb often referred to as a thermobaric weapon. By spreading the hydrogen out you get a larger bang because the mix reaches a better mixture between the air (oxidizer) and fuel (hydrogen) powering the explosion. It's damn nifty and props to them, but it's not a hydrogen bomb in the conventionally used sense of the word.

I really dislike the term hydrogen bomb because I don't want anyone, anywhere to confuse the terminology and give RU any excuses to escalate from conventional weapons, which probably sounds like an overreaction but if you see the shit the russians use to justify their bullshit...

See: russian accusations of use of chemical weapons while they're being accused by ukraine of using chemical weapons. Don't give them loaded rhetorical talking points.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 month ago (2 children)

400lbs explosive is less than standard 500lbs bomb. The title makes it clear tbh

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 month ago

And using "lbs" makes it clear that the publication is not targeted towards people who think critically.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 month ago (1 children)

No idea what this even means tbf

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 month ago (1 children)

500 lbs is the standard size bomb that US fighter aircraft carry. Some of them can carry up to 2500 lb bombs, but lose their stealth capabilities because the bomb is outside the airframe.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 month ago

So basically, really big carbomb