Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site ucbvax.ARPA Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!ihnp4!zehntel!dual!ucbvax!medin From: medin@ucbvax.ARPA (Milo Medin) Newsgroups: net.politics Subject: Re: Re: Re: Re:Expertise:Nuclear War Casualties Message-ID: <3601@ucbvax.ARPA> Date: Sun, 2-Dec-84 14:48:02 EST Article-I.D.: ucbvax.3601 Posted: Sun Dec 2 14:48:02 1984 Date-Received: Tue, 4-Dec-84 07:39:42 EST References: <328@whuxl.UUCP> <5000116@uokvax.UUCP> <372@whuxl.UUCP> <148@talcott.UUCP> Organization: University of California at Berkeley Lines: 19 > That's a pretty liberal estimate (in more than one sense). First, most of > our bombs are merely three to ten times as large as the Hiroshima bombs > (ex: Pershing II's are 150 kilotons). Second, in any nuclear scenario, > at most a quarter of our nuclear stockpile would be used (because the more > missiles we send, the more get destroyed in the silos, and also because > missiles in general have a high failure rate). Thus only half the world > will get destroyed instead of all of it. That's still nothing to cheer > about, though... > --- > Greg Kuperberg > harvard!talcott!gjk > > "Eureka!" -Archimedes Pershing II's are equipped with the WD-70 (I believe) warhead. This is equipped with dial-a-yield, and can be adjusted from what I thought was 5 to 70 kilotons. Where did you get the 150 kt figure? Milo