# Nuclear capable catapults? **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [October 26, 2011, 2:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nuclear-capable-catapults/600810 "2011-10-26T02:22:08Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Ranchoth](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ranchoth/32/1066_2.png) [@Ranchoth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ranchoth)\ **Post date:** [October 26, 2011, 2:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nuclear-capable-catapults/600810/1 "2011-10-26T02:22:08Z")
Call me inspired by the upcoming Punkin’ Chunkin’ competition, and the engineering efforts of the Libyan rebels… To be specific, are there any _existing_ siege engine designs—like a catapult, trebuchet, etc—that could deliver a small nuclear weapon to a target _without_ killing the launch crew or the siege engine? For “small,” I’m specifically listing the [W-54 “Davy Crokett”](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Davy_Crockett_%28nuclear_device%29), which weighed 51 lbs, and had a yield of about 20 tons [sic] of TNT. According to at least [one site I’ve seen](http://www.guntruck.com/DavyCrockett.html), a 20-ton nuclear explosion would produce lethal radiation out to about between…400, 500 meters. One can calculate[the other effects for 0.02 kilotons here.](http://www.alternatewars.com/BBOW/ABC_Weapons/Nuke_Effects_Calculator.htm) And yes, I realize that this is a _slightly_ impractical weapons system concept. But when has that ever stopped us? 😃 ---
**Author:** ![dolphinboy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dolphinboy/32/330_2.png) [@dolphinboy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dolphinboy)\ **Post date:** [October 26, 2011, 2:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nuclear-capable-catapults/600810/2 "2011-10-26T02:26:13Z")
What is the weight of the pumpkins used in the pumpkin chucking competitions? They don’t look like they are 50 lbs… ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [October 26, 2011, 2:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nuclear-capable-catapults/600810/3 "2011-10-26T02:28:42Z")
Designs? Sure. It’s trivially easy to scale up any trebuchet design to accommodate any given payload mass, and there are real-world trebs that get well over that range. Whether any has actually been built, I don’t know, but I wouldn’t be surprised. ---
**Author:** ![billfish678](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/7bcc69/32.png) [@billfish678](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/billfish678)\ **Post date:** [October 26, 2011, 2:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nuclear-capable-catapults/600810/4 "2011-10-26T02:35:50Z")
On TV I’ve seen “trebs” that chunk small cars a decent distance. Take “decent distance” and multiply by weight of small car divided by 50 lbs and there is your ballpark answer right there. ---
**Author:** ![dracoi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/90db22/32.png) [@dracoi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dracoi)\ **Post date:** [October 26, 2011, 2:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nuclear-capable-catapults/600810/5 "2011-10-26T02:44:06Z")
If you put your trebuchet behind an earthen berm, you can block the majority of that radiation and go back to worrying about the actual blast. Given the up-and-over firing style, this wouldn’t be a problem offensively, though you’d spend a lot of effort moving that much dirt around. You could also try some sort of mobile lead shielding. It sounds like this would mean a range of just 150-200 meters should be sufficient, and that’s child’s play even for ancient trebuchets. ---
**Author:** ![TriPolar](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tripolar/32/3008_2.png) [@TriPolar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TriPolar)\ **Post date:** [October 26, 2011, 2:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nuclear-capable-catapults/600810/6 "2011-10-26T02:51:11Z")
[Wikipedia Trebuchet article](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trebuchet#Counterweight_trebuchet) > [@](#): > > Average weight of the projectiles was probably around 50–100 kg, with a range of ca. 300 meters. That was 800 years ago. Doesn’t sound to difficult to send half that weight another 100 - 200 meters. You might want to get further away than that, which you could do with a long rope attached to the release lever. That’s assuming they can’t work up other triggering mechanisms using modern technology. But they have to stay close enough to the machine to protect it from manned assault. And they have to stay far enough away from the nearest artllery or RPG. RPGs make the minimum distance at least 1000 meters, probably more. But if a trebuchet made out of wood and rope can get half way there, one made of steel can’t be too hard to build if the materials are available. Getting that nuclear weapon might be the tough part of the job. ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [October 26, 2011, 2:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nuclear-capable-catapults/600810/7 "2011-10-26T02:53:14Z")
You could also enhance your survivability just by launching over the top of an already-existing hill. ---
**Author:** ![billfish678](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/7bcc69/32.png) [@billfish678](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/billfish678)\ **Post date:** [October 26, 2011, 2:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nuclear-capable-catapults/600810/8 "2011-10-26T02:57:59Z")
Hills smills and berms smerms… dig a small hole for each guy with a small berm and use some ropes to pull the trigger. Radiation problem greatly reduced. ---
**Author:** ![TriPolar](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tripolar/32/3008_2.png) [@TriPolar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TriPolar)\ **Post date:** [October 26, 2011, 2:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nuclear-capable-catapults/600810/9 "2011-10-26T02:59:39Z")
Yeah but radiation isn’t the only danger. When they see you setting up the giant war machine, they might start shooting. You have to be out of range of their weapons. A better approach might be to build a large wooden rabbit. ---
**Author:** ![mac\_bolan00](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/b3f665/32.png) [@mac\_bolan00](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mac_bolan00)\ **Post date:** [October 26, 2011, 2:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nuclear-capable-catapults/600810/10 "2011-10-26T02:59:45Z")
the davy crockett system (m-28 and m-29) were nominated as being the dumbest weapons ever designed. this is because the missile, m-388, had a yield between 10 and 20 tonnes, can be heaved to a maximum range of only 2.5 miles (1.2 miles for the m-28) whereas the blast will yield a fatal dose to humans within 0.25 miles. a 1.0-mile clearance looks rather iffy especially under (nuclear) battlefield conditions. they say the only dumber weapon would be a nuclear hand grenade. but the davy crockett had clear tactical value to NATO forces at the time. smarter and more modern delivery systems eliminated its need. your launch system will be useful as such: to launch a heavy weapon. much of a rocket’s force is expended during launch and initial acceleration. some assistance during launch will extend the range considerably. ---
**Author:** ![Nametag](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/nametag/32/406_2.png) [@Nametag](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Nametag)\ **Post date:** [October 26, 2011, 6:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nuclear-capable-catapults/600810/11 "2011-10-26T06:00:10Z")
> [@TriPolar](#): > > Yeah but radiation isn’t the only danger. When they see you setting up the giant war machine, they might start shooting. You have to be out of range of their weapons. > > A better approach might be to build a large wooden rabbit. Or a large wooden badger… ---
**Author:** ![Alka\_Seltzer](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/c89c15/32.png) [@Alka\_Seltzer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Alka_Seltzer)\ **Post date:** [October 26, 2011, 8:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nuclear-capable-catapults/600810/12 "2011-10-26T08:44:02Z")
I’d employ a [kamikaze camel](http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/1705341.stm). ---
**Author:** ![Leo\_Bloom](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/leo_bloom/32/10377_2.png) [@Leo\_Bloom](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Leo_Bloom)\ **Post date:** [October 26, 2011, 11:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nuclear-capable-catapults/600810/13 "2011-10-26T11:02:20Z")
> [@TriPolar](#): > > … > > A better approach might be to build a large wooden rabbit. Do mean the [Rabbit of Caerbannog](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rabbit_of_Caerbannog) or of Carter? ---
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [October 26, 2011, 12:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nuclear-capable-catapults/600810/14 "2011-10-26T12:34:30Z")
> [@mac\_bolan00](#): > > the davy crockett system (m-28 and m-29) were nominated as being the dumbest weapons ever designed. this is because the missile, m-388, had a yield between 10 and 20 tonnes, can be heaved to a maximum range of only 2.5 miles (1.2 miles for the m-28) whereas the blast will yield a fatal dose to humans within 0.25 miles. a 1.0-mile clearance looks rather iffy especially under (nuclear) battlefield conditions. they say the only dumber weapon would be a nuclear hand grenade. IIRC, the Navy also developed an equally dumb weapons; a nuclear-tipped torpedo whose fatal-to-subs blast radius was larger than its range. ---
**Author:** ![Alka\_Seltzer](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/c89c15/32.png) [@Alka\_Seltzer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Alka_Seltzer)\ **Post date:** [October 26, 2011, 4:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nuclear-capable-catapults/600810/15 "2011-10-26T16:29:28Z")
> [@Der\_Trihs](#): > > IIRC, the Navy also developed an equally dumb weapons; a nuclear-tipped torpedo whose fatal-to-subs blast radius was larger than its range. Well, dumb from the point of view of the safety of the operator, but they could have been used as a weapon of last resort against a ballistic missle submarine. Similarly, the US air force had nuclear tipped air-to-air missiles for shooting down Russian bombers. Prior to the widespread introduction of ICBMs these weapons might have been useful in the event of a nuclear exchange. While we’re on the subject of silly nuclear weapons, the British considered deploying a nuclear mine with a [chicken](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blue_Peacock) inside it. ---
**Author:** ![wevets](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/e9a140/32.png) [@wevets](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wevets)\ **Post date:** [October 26, 2011, 5:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nuclear-capable-catapults/600810/16 "2011-10-26T17:29:15Z")
> [@Der\_Trihs](#): > > IIRC, the Navy also developed an equally dumb weapons; a nuclear-tipped torpedo whose fatal-to-subs blast radius was larger than its range. When I first read this, I thought perhaps it was an air-dropped or rocket-launched torpedo, but a quick glance at wikipedia notes that the Mk 45 nuclear-armed torpedo was intended to be submarine-launched: > [@wikipedia](#): > > When fitted with the W34 warhead, ASTOR was considered to have a kill probability of 2 (or “Him and Me”), because the underwater blast radius was greater than the standard range of the torpedo.[3] > **[Mark 45 torpedo](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_45_torpedo)** > > The Mark 45 anti-submarine torpedo, a.k.a. ASTOR, was a submarine-launched wire-guided nuclear torpedo designed by the United States Navy for use against high-speed, deep-diving, enemy submarines. This was one of several weapons recommended for implementation by Project Nobska, a 1956 summer study on submarine warfare. The 19-inch (483 mm) torpedo was fitted with a W34 nuclear warhead. The need to maintain direct control over the warhead meant that a wire connection had to be maintained betwee What were they thinking? In a related issue, the [Nike-Hercules](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MIM-14_Nike-Hercules) antiaircraft missile system envisioned destroying incoming Soviet bombers with nuclear warheads. While a 2 kT blast 70 miles from a city is definitely preferable to a 30 kT blast in the city, it’s probably not optimal either - but then what aspect of global thermonuclear war really is? Let’s just play a nice game of chess. ---
**Author:** ![dracoi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/90db22/32.png) [@dracoi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dracoi)\ **Post date:** [October 26, 2011, 5:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nuclear-capable-catapults/600810/17 "2011-10-26T17:34:47Z")
> [@wevets](#): > > [Mark 45 torpedo - Wikipedia](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_45_torpedo) > What were they thinking? I think Alka Seltzer nailed it already on this question. If the choice is “We lose one submarine” vs “We lose the eastern seaboard” then it’s a pretty useful weapon. ---
**Author:** ![Gray\_Ghost](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/c0e974/32.png) [@Gray\_Ghost](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gray_Ghost)\ **Post date:** [October 26, 2011, 6:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nuclear-capable-catapults/600810/18 "2011-10-26T18:57:23Z")
I doubt the claims of the wiki for the Mk-45 nuclear torpedo that detonation would automatically kill the launching submarine, particularly if the Mk-45 indeed had a range of 5-8 miles (9000 to 14,000 yards). A similar warhead for the ASROC system was [tested in May 1962](http://www.navy.mil/navydata/cno/n87/usw/issue_24/frigate_bird2.htm). The Swordfish test utilized a “fully-manned” observer submarine, 4000 yds from the intended ground zero. The ASROC’s W-44 warhead had a nominal yield of 10kT; the W-34 used in the Mk-45 had a yield of 11 kt. The spray dome for Swordfish was 3000 feet across, so being closer than that to the explosion would be a bad idea. The Wahoo test in Operation Hardtack utilized a 9 kt device, detonated at 2000 feet below the surface. It formed [a base surge 2.5 miles in diameter.](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Underwater_explosion) So I would definitely be uncomfortable being closer than, say, a mile and half from detonation, but I think it is inaccurate to say that launching the Mk-45 automatically meant the death of the launching submarine. I believe, though I can’t prove, the Mk-45 was merely a stopgap until the considerable technical difficulties in [SUBROC’](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UUM-44_SUBROC)s development were solved. ---
**Author:** ![Gray\_Ghost](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/c0e974/32.png) [@Gray\_Ghost](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gray_Ghost)\ **Post date:** [October 26, 2011, 7:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nuclear-capable-catapults/600810/19 "2011-10-26T19:10:46Z")
> [@wevets](#): > > In a related issue, the [Nike-Hercules](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MIM-14_Nike-Hercules) antiaircraft missile system envisioned destroying incoming Soviet bombers with nuclear warheads. While a 2 kT blast 70 miles from a city is definitely preferable to a 30 kT blast in the city, it’s probably not optimal either - but then what aspect of global thermonuclear war really is? Let’s just play a nice game of chess. The Nike-Hercules system was tested, in the last fully open-air U.S. nuclear detonation, in the [Tightrope test during Operation Dominic (or Fishbowl, which I gather refers to the high-altitude tests during Dominic)](http://nuclearweaponarchive.org/Usa/Tests/Dominic.html). While the exact yield isn’t publicly known for certain, the [wiki for Tightrope](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Fishbowl#Tightrope) cites a .pdf stating the yield was 10kT. The warhead was detonated at roughly 70,000 feet over the island, [3 km SSW of Johnson Island.](http://www.astronautix.com/lvs/nikcules.htm) (you might have to scroll down to get to Tightrope on that link) The effects were witnessed to be: > [@](#): > > On Johnston Island an intense white flash, to bright to view even through high density goggles, was accompanied by a strong heat pulse. A yellow-orange disc formed, slowly changing to a purple toroid which faded from view after several minutes. Which is probably better than letting the bomber drop its load. OTOH, the collateral damage from a Spartan (1.2 MT) ABM would probably be severe. ---
**Author:** ![Alka\_Seltzer](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/c89c15/32.png) [@Alka\_Seltzer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Alka_Seltzer)\ **Post date:** [October 26, 2011, 7:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nuclear-capable-catapults/600810/20 "2011-10-26T19:15:25Z")
Also bear in mind the submarine would have been able to turn away and open the range by a useful amount (although this may have been limited by the wire guidance system). [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nuclear-capable-catapults/600810.md?page=2)