Davy Crockett- Equivalent of NASR

[Bratva]

This thread is about to give people idea about NASR yield, area of destruction and the effects that will remain for how much time by giving an equivalent device example

Test video of Davy Crockett

https://gfycat.com/PlainRevolvingAzurevase

US officials view a W54 nuclear warhead, as used on the Davy Crockett. The unusually small size of the warhead is apparent.

The Davy Crockett recoilless spigot gun was developed in the late 1950s for use against Soviet and North Korean armor and troops in case war broke out in Europe or the Korean peninsula. Davy Crockett Sections were assigned to United States Army Europe and Eighth United States Army armor and mechanized and non-mechanized infantry battalions. During alerts to the Inner German border in the Fulda Gap the Davy Crocketts accompanied their battalions. All V Corps (including 3rd Armored Division) combat maneuver battalions had preassigned positions in the Fulda Gap. These were known as GDP (General Defense Plan) positions.

The Davy Crockett sections were included in these defensive deployment plans. In addition to the Davy Crocketts (e.g., assigned to the 3rd Armored Division), V Corps had nuclear artillery rounds and Atomic Demolition Mines, and these were also targeted on the Fulda Gap. On the Korean peninsula, units assigned the Davy Crockett weapons primarily planned to use the passes that funneled armor as killing grounds, creating temporarily deadly radioactive zones roadblocked by destroyed tanks and other vehicles.

The M-388 round used a version of the W54 warhead, a very small sub-kiloton fission device. The Mk-54 weighed about 51 lb (23 kg), with a yield equivalent to somewhere between 10 to 20 tons of TNT—very close to the minimum practical size and yield for a fission warhead. The only selectable feature with either versions of the Davy Crockett (M28 & M29) was the height-of-burst dial on the warhead. Post-Davy Crockett versions of the W54 nuclear device apparently had a selectable yield feature (for Hi/Lo Switch and Launching Piston references). The complete round weighed 76 lb (34.5 kg). It was 31 in. (78.7 cm) long with a diameter of 11 in. (28 cm) at its widest point; a subcaliber piston at the back of the shell was inserted into the launcher's barrel for firing

Both recoilless guns proved to have poor accuracy in testing, so the shell's greatest effect would have been its extreme radiation hazard. The M-388 would produce an almost instantly lethal radiation dosage (in excess of 10,000 rem, 100 Sv) within 500 feet (150 m), and a probably fatal dose (around 600 rem, 6 Sv) within a quarter mile (400 m).The weapon did not have an abort function; if fired, the warhead would explode


Versions of the W54 warhead were also used in the Special Atomic Demolition Munition project and the AIM-26A Falcon.


Mk-54 (Davy Crockett) – 10 or 20 ton yield, Davy Crockett Gun warhead
Mk-54 (SADM) – variable yield 10 ton to 1 kiloton, Special Atomic Demolition Munition device
W-54 – 250 ton yield, warhead for AIM-26 Falcon air-to-air missile

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Davy_Crockett_(nuclear_device)

 

[Zahoor Raja-Jani]

the most close match of Nasr
Mk-54 (SADM) – variable yield 10 ton to 1 kiloton, Special Atomic Demolition Munition device

Nasr most probably designed to use 1 KT neutron warhead but also can carry upto 10 KT warhead.

 

[Skaði]

Try Honest John instead. Its W31 variable yield warhead had a kiloton range of 2, 10 or 30 kt, though several other warhead designs were mated to the missile, including chemical warheads:

It's a good equivalent of the NASR missile system in terms of range and payload, though it's an unguided rocket.

The missile equivalent of the NASR would be Lance, which mimics the range, flight profile and payload:

ATACMS replaced Lance in the US. It's non-nuclear:

M28 is the guided rocket companion to ATACMS:

While Davy Crockett's yield may be similar to NASR, it's important to remember that nuclear devices aren't created equally. Thermonuclear, boasted-fission, fission and neutron bombs all produce different effects, as can failed or fizzled devices. A comparision between NASR and Davy crockett may therefore be a comparision between two un-equal systems, which could lead to false conclusions being made about the equality of the two systems.

Here's the Davy Crockett's blast in action:

And one for Honest John:

I'm surprised Pakistan hasn't tried large-caliber or railway artillery like Atomic Annie:

 

[war&peace]

Without going into details of which resembles most closely to NASR, what we see here is the perfect example of a doctrine of using tactical nuclear weapons by USA when the circumstances warranted i.e. a direct battle between US and USSR armies in Europe...so Pak-India situation is the same and Pakistan's Nasr missile fits the bill perfectly.

 

[باپ]

Nasr is better in command and control as it still needs highest level authorization to be used and thats why fitted on TEL and larger missile instead of a recoilless gun or shoulder / jeep mounted.

 

[Tipu7]

The M-388 would produce an almost instantly lethal radiation dosage (in excess of 10,000 rem, 100 Sv) within 500 feet (150 m), and a probably fatal dose (around 600 rem, 6 Sv) within a quarter mile (400 m)

Only point related to NASR ........

This thread is about to give people idea about NASR yield, area of destruction and the effects that will remain for how much time by giving an equivalent device example

Test video of Davy Crockett

https://gfycat.com/PlainRevolvingAzurevase

US officials view a W54 nuclear warhead, as used on the Davy Crockett. The unusually small size of the warhead is apparent.

The Davy Crockett recoilless spigot gun was developed in the late 1950s for use against Soviet and North Korean armor and troops in case war broke out in Europe or the Korean peninsula. Davy Crockett Sections were assigned to United States Army Europe and Eighth United States Army armor and mechanized and non-mechanized infantry battalions. During alerts to the Inner German border in the Fulda Gap the Davy Crocketts accompanied their battalions. All V Corps (including 3rd Armored Division) combat maneuver battalions had preassigned positions in the Fulda Gap. These were known as GDP (General Defense Plan) positions.

The Davy Crockett sections were included in these defensive deployment plans. In addition to the Davy Crocketts (e.g., assigned to the 3rd Armored Division), V Corps had nuclear artillery rounds and Atomic Demolition Mines, and these were also targeted on the Fulda Gap. On the Korean peninsula, units assigned the Davy Crockett weapons primarily planned to use the passes that funneled armor as killing grounds, creating temporarily deadly radioactive zones roadblocked by destroyed tanks and other vehicles.

The M-388 round used a version of the W54 warhead, a very small sub-kiloton fission device. The Mk-54 weighed about 51 lb (23 kg), with a yield equivalent to somewhere between 10 to 20 tons of TNT—very close to the minimum practical size and yield for a fission warhead. The only selectable feature with either versions of the Davy Crockett (M28 & M29) was the height-of-burst dial on the warhead. Post-Davy Crockett versions of the W54 nuclear device apparently had a selectable yield feature (for Hi/Lo Switch and Launching Piston references). The complete round weighed 76 lb (34.5 kg). It was 31 in. (78.7 cm) long with a diameter of 11 in. (28 cm) at its widest point; a subcaliber piston at the back of the shell was inserted into the launcher's barrel for firing

Both recoilless guns proved to have poor accuracy in testing, so the shell's greatest effect would have been its extreme radiation hazard. The M-388 would produce an almost instantly lethal radiation dosage (in excess of 10,000 rem, 100 Sv) within 500 feet (150 m), and a probably fatal dose (around 600 rem, 6 Sv) within a quarter mile (400 m).The weapon did not have an abort function; if fired, the warhead would explode


Versions of the W54 warhead were also used in the Special Atomic Demolition Munition project and the AIM-26A Falcon.


Mk-54 (Davy Crockett) – 10 or 20 ton yield, Davy Crockett Gun warhead
Mk-54 (SADM) – variable yield 10 ton to 1 kiloton, Special Atomic Demolition Munition device
W-54 – 250 ton yield, warhead for AIM-26 Falcon air-to-air missile

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Davy_Crockett_(nuclear_device)

But it's worth noting that we are comparing a 21st century Tactical Nuclear system with those of 50s & 60s.......

 

[war&peace]

But it's worth noting that we are comparing a 21st century Tactical Nuclear system with those of 50s & 60s.......

Yes but NASR has lighter and more advanced warhead (Neutron bomb) and longer range of 60 to 80 km which is far more than the Davy Crockett. Nasr will have much larger area coverage for lethal dosage but the best part is that it is clean bomb and there would be no residual radiactive material in the area so it will be useable by human after a short time.

 

[Bratva]

Only point related to NASR ........


But it's worth noting that we are comparing a 21st century Tactical Nuclear system with those of 50s & 60s.......

But its worth mentioining pakistan achieved just that what was achieved in 50's 60's with only exception that it is possibility nasr has a tritium boosted nuke head thereby giving more yield with a smaller warhead than that of 60's warhead

 

[Tipu7]

Pakistan have achieved much more in tactical nuclear weaponry.
We own "next generation" Tactical Nuclear weapons.
At core, the idea is same as nuclear artillery or nuclear rockets developed by NATO & Soviet half century ago, but when we consider the development in guidance systems, range, assurance, payload and ability to overcome anti ballistic protection systems, then Indeed NASR is boss.
I will not be surprised if we develop even more advance variant of NASR, with same carrying capability but lighter in weight, more in range and ECCM capabilities in order to survive in heavy ECM environment.......

But its worth mentioining pakistan achieved just that what was achieved in 50's 60's with only exception that it is possibility nasr will tritium boosted nuke head thereby giving more yield with a smaller warhead

 

[django]

Nasr is better in command and control as it still needs highest level authorization to be used and thats why fitted on TEL and larger missile instead of a recoilless gun or shoulder / jeep mounted.

How far or close in your opinion are we to developing full scale thermonuclear capability.

 

[باپ]

How far or close in your opinion are we to developing full scale thermonuclear capability.

Technically any device involving fission and Fusion is a thermonuclear device and all modern designs work on this principle,even Nasr.
In general a device of megaton or above yield is called a Hydrogen bomb,which no country builds anymore.
Such large yields were needed in cold war era when missile guidance was crude and missiles had accuracy of kilometres not metres. If you launched your missile towards an industrial base of enemy country, chances were that your nuke will detonate within 5 kilometre radius of actual target. You needed an Almighty blast to have any chance to destroy the actual target from 5 kilometre away. That's why back then 5 megaton nukes were standard.
Now missile guidance is far accurate and the warhead will fall within a few hundred meters of the target or even a few tens of meter and you will destroy the target with much smaller blast.

 

[django]

Technically any device involving fission and Fusion is a thermonuclear device and all modern designs work on this principle,even Nasr.
In general a device of megaton or above yield is called a Hydrogen bomb,which no country builds anymore.
Such large yields were needed in cold war era when missile guidance was crude and missiles had accuracy of kilometres not metres. If you launched your missile towards an industrial base of enemy country, chances were that your nuke will detonate within 5 kilometre radius of actual target. You needed an Almighty blast to have any chance to destroy the actual target from 5 kilometre away. That's why back then 5 megaton nukes were standard.
Now missile guidance is far accurate and the warhead will fall within a few hundred meters of the target or even a few tens of meter and you will destroy the target with much smaller blast.

In other words we are using fission boosted weapons not hydrogen bombs, we should still aim for this capability and we may well have it..hopefully, according to Hoodbhoy we have 20 kiloton nukes , may be he is wrong, i would certainly like a much larger yield.......... take out delhi with one strike

 

[Bratva]

Pakistan have achieved much more in tactical nuclear weaponry.
We own "next generation" Tactical Nuclear weapons.
At core, the idea is same as nuclear artillery or nuclear rockets developed by NATO & Soviet half century ago, but when we consider the development in guidance systems, range, assurance, payload and ability to overcome anti ballistic protection systems, then Indeed NASR is boss.
I will not be surprised if we develop even more advance variant of NASR, with same carrying capability but lighter in weight, more in range and ECCM capabilities in order to survive in heavy ECM environment.......

I'm talking about the miniaturization of nuclear warhead. Not about the delivery system. 1998 was the first time Paksitan tested a standard size large plutonium based warhead. It took them 12-13 years to minituarize the warhead and declared the capability of NASR. So in terms of Miniaturization of warhead and creating associated Plutonium producing reactors and tritium manufacturing facilities which started from 2003-2004 ish , we are at that stage where America was in 60's with only exception is America didnt used tritium in minituarized warheads. but due to advancements in technology there is a posibility Pakistan might have used it in their miniaturized warheads

 

[Faiez]

But its worth mentioining pakistan achieved just that what was achieved in 50's 60's with only exception that it is possibility nasr has a tritium boosted nuke head thereby giving more yield with a smaller warhead than that of 60's warhead

Agreed !