Hopefully they dont get bigger. Theyre beautiful, but the idea of of weapons like that and all the conflict going on right now scarea the shit outta me
Worlds Biggest Bomb that and no Countrey will ever make a Bomb that big Again But I Remember the IRA Manchester Bomb in 1996 and I was near that at the Time and the Noice from that Bomb Sounded like that Nuclear Bomb.
Greatest waste of greatest potential of mankind. So many wonderful places to drop one. Mekka, Jerusalem, Vatican, Teheran, Pyongyang, Havana, Bogota, Kabul, Damascus, list goes on. Nukes really could help making our world a better place.
SAD SAD DAYS AHEAD FOLKS.......AND NUKES ARE STONE AGE W.M.Ds......Just think og all the trillions and trillions of dollars spent on weapons programs.....you got teslas scaler weapons.....what else have these sick bastards concocted to use for there planned destruction of the old world order....most of our world leaders have the same enemy.....free humanity and nationalism....look what the d.o.j just did to texas for tsa molestation
@Busserson hydrogen bomb is a bomb that starts a nuclear blast inside hydrogen. this energy makes hydrogen start nuclear decomposition in its turn. its not burning there, it blasts with a nuclear blast.
One of the things i never understood is that at the moment of a nuclear detonation there is a EMP pulse. Why didn't it destroy the electronics in the bomber?
Let us imagine just for a moment that there are "INTELLIGENT BEINGS" in the UNIVERSE monitoring "OUR SPECIES" "MENTAL EVOLUTION PROGRESS". Is there a possibly that the ONLY thing that could be said about OUR SPECIES is that WE have become MASTERS of OUR OWN ANNIHILATION! Right NOW while I'm posting this comment MORE EFFECTIVE ways are being DEVELOPED to SPEED UP that PROCESS!!!!
Good News and Bad News people America and Russia have signed a new deal which means they are only allowed to have 3000 nukes. Bad news is thats still enough to destroy the world severeal times over so smile!!!! :-)
its always the russians who have to have the biggest isnt it?!?!?!?... besides the biggest badass and thats chuck norris!!! HAHAHA! SUCK ON THAT U RUSSIANS!!!!!
quotes from albert einstein "i dont know about world war 3but iknow we will fight ww4 with sticks nd stones" meaning nucclear will wipe out the world cause so powerful
the bad thing about the destructive power of these types of bombs is that if the total destructive power of the blast does not kill you the vacuum type affect will and if none of those kills you then the heat will but only if you can get past wind speeds of 200 or more mph and try not to break anything while your being thrown through the air
Damn, I went to bed watching this..... Worst nightmare I've ever had, I hope we don't have WWIII, I'd literally start crying if I saw that shit explode and I knew I was gonna die...., if it was that big, imagine if they didn't scale it down
Why do these things exist! The original Atom Bomb wiped out cities. Why on Earth were they so unhappy with the power of it they had to go producing even more powerful Nukes. Sick!
"why something so large" the soviets always had to flex muscle to america. They were not comfortable with there pecker. They said this could never be used as a weapon....it was detonated just before a negotiation with the united states. They always did somthing like this before talking with the usa. Kruschev was just a big kid. I have learned that the soviets were NEVER EVER close to the usa in terms of military or economics. They always bluffed at all times
WHAT THE FUCK??!! WE COULD HAVE DIES IF THE USSR MASS PRODUCED ONE OF THESE!! If we had pissed them off if they mass produced these we would have FUCKED!!!!!
@Killerof2010 not really, they had to transport that on a plane and we could shoot that, at the same time we would have nukes in the atmosphere headed for russia
Tsar Bomba was not the largest thermonuclear device in the world, it is only the largest to have ever been detonated. It was designed to be 100 mega tons, but they chopped it in half to avoid the large amount of fallout that would follow. Today, I'm sure there are much larger "nukes" in both American and Russian stockpiles. Respect, however, goes to the Soviets for having the balls to test it out.
I believe they rethought the process of making increasingly larger bombs and deemed it to be impractical, to dirty, and easier to knock out of the sky and even less effective in terms of damage. So now they have icbm's with multiple smaller warheads on board, to carpet bomb an area, multiple smaller yields ammount to greater damage than one big one equall to the sum.
@StrangeDeimos Very true. I'm glad someone else thinks like I do! I did mean "larger 'nukes'" as in larger damage via nuclear device. ICBMs are, without a doubt, very effective, but lets hope we never have to use them. The United States OR Russia.
@FalloutRadius Yeah something this size would be impractical. Its more a show piece than an effective weapon. They have nothing near this size. The russians used to have the SS-18 "Satan", a 25 megaton ICBM! But those are gone too.
@FalloutRadius Yeah it could carry that one huge warhead or smaller ones. Generally tho like the other guy said if you carpet an area with smaller ones you will have more damage.
@FalloutRadius No, you're thinking of MIRVs....for Multiple Independent Re-entry Vehicles. MIRVs could carry ten or twelve independently targetable warheads but by treaty they limited them to three warheads....which is what ours carry today and have for the last 30 years or so.
The tsar was dropped on the Novaya Zemlya island; the ground zero point was somewhere near the pond at 73.544444,54.705833 (copy the coordinates from here, open google maps and drop them into the search bar). It was an air burst at 2.5 miles altitude; the fire ball (1.5mi radius) didn't touch the ground, though the blast effects certainly did.
One comparison I found was that the Tsar released about 1/4 the energy that the Krakatoa eruption in 1870 did.
@ww2production: Consider: Tsar was ~50 MT; the Chixchulub meteor was about 50 TT, or 1,000,000 times that in energy release, and it did not broach the crust into the mantle below it; it dug about 6 km into the 20 km crust.
The planet is a tough old bird; even breaching the mantle would not have destroyed it. That did happen during the moon-creation event called the Big Splash, but even that didn't destroy the Earth, just melted it through. You might destroy all life, but not the planet.
@ww2production: Oh. You did. Wow, I'm glad to know, because there is a difference, as I hope you understand.
However, the answer is still no. To kill all life on the planet would take an energy release in excess of the Chixchulub meteor that killed all the dinosaurs. Since it was on the rough order of a million times larger than Tsar Bomba, I don't think that is yet within our grasp.
@ww2production It would take multiple bombs and all that would do is kill all life but it would take a lot unless we learn how to control a asteroid in to the earth lol
Depends what you call 'damage'. First strike nuclear attacks would likely be detonated in the sky due to the devastating effects of an EMP burst. Taking out the enemies communications would be a major priority. Detonating a nuclear device at ground level would create massive radioactive fallout. So while the effects of both would obviously be instant and devastating, each has it's 'advantages', depending what effect you desire. Military attack = sky, population = ground imo.
@Stmdog14 most likely, depending on your distance from detonation, how the wind carried the radioactive fallout etc. The sheer size of todays weapons and the potential devastion that would ensue is far, far worse compared to Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
@Stmdog14: Nothing will help if you are too close to the center. Most of the loss of life in Japan happened from falling structures from 1 to 10 km away from the center, where getting under a solid table may possibly have saved one.
@jm338 What I have read was disturbing. If attacked, a nuclear device would be detonated in the atmosphere first. This would disable ALL electronic and communication devices. Ground nukes would follow. A nuke detonated on the ground would spread radiation permanently through soil and water. In the atmosphere it disperses much faster.
@wannabehendrix The radioactive fallout from the bomb would not be permanent. Different forms of radiation have different half lives, but none is infinite.
@jm338 Above surface. If it is detonated on the surface a lot of energy is lost hitting the ground, something like that. Detonating it above the ground creates a bigger blast/damage zone. They use this strategy with conventional bombs too. A quick google search would provide a detailed explanation, and the physics behind i, if your interested. I don't know that stuff, just the result.
@SuperleggeraVW while the blast zone would be bigger the real reason the blow it up above ground is that if they were to use chemicals/nuclear bombs it would spread the radiation/chemicals over a much larger area.
@jm338: Depends. The greatest blast and heat effects occur with a shallow air blast; say a few thousands of feet above the surface.If you're trying to dig a n ICBM out of a hardened silo, though a surface blast would probably be best.
@fartrage: Crap. If you think world powers should have learned to lie down with the lambs, you are highly mistaken. This was the first time ever that man has built weapons which could wipe life from an area completely; they first treated them like WWII style bombs, but learned quickly that they were strategic, not tactical weapons. Learning is still on-going. Be grateful.
they did make the 100 mega ton nuke, thats what a Tsar bomb is, they just didn't want to drop that much tonnage in a test, and so they dropped the toned down version. At least that's what they say, who knows the truth? The USSR said a lot, and some at least we know was false.
@hunterg24: The reasons that they did do so are rather limited: danger of massive fallout; fear of massively bad PR (the hierarchy in the USSR weren't as immune to that as many thought), a desire to get the crew of the bomber back again. What other black, evil reasons could there be?
bad skin burn upto 60 miles away no way is the fireball 100 miles wide. Its a 57MT bomb that was really 100 MT design but some of the uranium was replaced with lead so it would not pollute as much.
@NielsShoe 3rd degree burns up to 60 miles away from blast. thats a 60 mile radius of Horrible burn, which will kill if not treated. the Fireball does extend at a Diameter of 100 miles, not radius, Diameter. And the shockwave of the Tsar knocked peoples windows as far as Sweden, which is 600 miles away from ground zero.
@rothril: No, 3 miles radius, 1.5 miles diameter. The burns 60 miles away would indeed have been horrible if the fireball had reached 50 miles.
Let's get over this "horrible burns" buggaboo, shall we? First, at 60 miles away they would be comparatively mild burns. Second, radiation burns are not different from fire burns except that rad can destroy deeper tissues (like microwaves can), or if the radiation was bad enough to inhibit the immune system. Other then that burns are burns.
@NielsShoe: See the wiki article. The fireball was 2.3 km (about 1.5 miles) in diameter. It didn't reach the ground, as the blast happened at 2.5 miles altitude.
Wow...I was in the United States Air Force back in the mid 80's...a 30mile wide crater and a 110 mile radius fire ball? For petes sake, what did they think they were doing? Yeah, we have numbers, but so do they....and to think we came close to this back in 88 and again a few times in the 90's. Didn't know? Believe me, you don't want to know...you'll sleep better that way. What could you do about it anyway? Hide under the desks like those 50's Civil Defense films?
@joelt6502: It's apparent that you didn't learn much there. There was no crater; the fireball didn't reach the ground. The fireball radius was 2.3 km.
As I pointed out above, the majority of casualties in H&N happened from collapsing structures (tiled roofs and corner pole supports), and crawling under a sturdy table is by far the best advice. Within a few km of ground zero, nothing is going to save you but pure luck. Outside that, duck and cover is good advice in any disaster.
The 'fireball' is always smaller then the blast radius. They say it's the other way around in this video. Really, discovery channel... :roll eyes:
The explanation on why they build this is just some ridiculous propaganda BS. They only build one of these bombs for experimental purposes (and to make the world shit their pants maybe), not to actually use it as a weapon.
@noxure where did they test this? i know in russia but they are already retarted and fucked up mentally and physicly from radioactivity but idc they are just cocky ppl
@noxure They did not mean the nukes Total destruction Fireball. the one with all the gamma rays, x rays and what not. they meant the fireball as in heat blast from the nuke. which is what gave people 3rd degree burns 60 miles away.
@mezaciems That is so incorrect... how would we put our planet out of orbit? really? the Meteor that hit killed the dinosaurs was 2.5 Teratons. a teraton is 1000 gigatons, a gigaton is 1000 megatons. just to give you a idea of how strong it was. and earth has been hit with hundreds of meteors that strong. and didn't get knocked out of orbit. they made it 50MT cause the added lead tempering to the fusion stage. to decrease the radioactive fallout by 95%.
@WhiteSmokes: Let's get this straight. Nothing, literally nothing we could possibly do with the technology we reach in the next 50 years will allow the planet's orbit to be disturbed by a centimeter. Breaking the planet into chunks would not change it's orbit, and we are far, far, far from being able to do that.
@mezaciems: Dream on. Blame the fear of bad PR when fallout rained all over Siberia, or the loss of their bomber crew. They wanted to impress the world, not kill their own people.
@mezaciems No, it was too impractical and large to make it 100. Eventually the more megatons you add starts to not matter. The blast diameter dosen't get any larger at a certain point. Due to uraniums splitting point.
@LemonadeRabbit The main reason was the radioactivity, in fact. They wanted to keep radioactivity low (which actually worked, as stated in the video).
@mezaciems it would take much more than 100MT with a astroid the saize that killed the dinos was mroe powerful than thousands upon thousands of nukes. and that didnt put us out of orbit, they were afraid of putting a hole in the Ozone and going to high into the atmosphere.
a little 100 megaton bomb could not put the mighty earth out of orbit,only mother nature's huge asteriods,comets and planetesimals traveling faster than bullets and hitting with 100 Million Mega tons or more can do that lol.
@finalblurGoogle (and youtube) is your friend. There were three tests called Sailorhat that exploded exactly 500 tons of TNT each in optimal conditions; they're on YouTube. There is a video there "1 TON Bomb"; I don't know how accurate the title is. Lots more.
Detonate that (TSAR) similar H-bomb at the surface of planet MARS particularly at ICE (frozen lake) or mountains of MARS to produce liquid water, and to erupt volcanoes creating carbon dioxide and water vapor Atmosphere. So that in the future new living things can survive or adapt on it; micro-organisms that consume CO2 and exhale Oxygen and releasing Nitrogen (side-product) or plants / trees that produce O2 and then human being and animals to complete the cycle (inhale O2 and exhale CO2).
@slashislashi You are aware the Tsar Bomba was created during the arms race between the USSR and the USA. The US created weapons like this but at a lower scale. And no they just wanted America to be erased from Earth. :)
@greenday4455: Not really. They wanted their economic model to prevail; they wanted for their country, families and themselves (in reverse order) to survive, preferably with their culture and civilization intact. As did those in the west. As it happened; all were better men than many people feared; no one pushed the button. But it isn't sickness; it's ambition, fear and anger which drove them; essentially the same as all other people.
Hopefully they dont get bigger. Theyre beautiful, but the idea of of weapons like that and all the conflict going on right now scarea the shit outta me
c00lCactus8D 5 days ago
nuke is for pussys my friends tsar bomb is for men
monogusta 1 week ago
and where was this detonated at in the u.s.a what state
sovietguy47 1 week ago
is the radiation leake after the bomb goes off any harm or just a little bit of radiation not much?
sovietguy47 1 week ago
Worlds Biggest Bomb that and no Countrey will ever make a Bomb that big Again But I Remember the IRA Manchester Bomb in 1996 and I was near that at the Time and the Noice from that Bomb Sounded like that Nuclear Bomb.
Emaroldisle 2 weeks ago
What if suicide bombers used nukes..shit they'd be blowin up cities
bobblefred45 4 weeks ago
American tech , not so good... Now Russians know how to build a bomb
MrSaad1932 2 months ago
Great work
kharpetian 2 months ago
I swear USA should steal that from Russia the drop it on Moscow
Lanesbeast11 2 months ago
Stuppid comunists! You guys know that they could chane the earth's orbit because of that blast?
Piotrek1985 2 months ago
das ist jetzt 50 jahre her
sprengmeister00 3 months ago
you can always count on russia to build a fuckin huge bomb...Then blow it up on some remote island.
ITALY6767 3 months ago
@ITALY6767 I think youll find America does that , Russia tested it in Siberia
jayguy508 1 month ago
What if you're directly under it? Will you survive like the eye of the storm or something?
sweet96635 3 months ago
@sweet96635 haha, i dont think so xD
alek865 3 months ago
@sweet96635 No. But you do get to die more or less instantly. Might be preferable to a slow death from radiation burns or fallout.
Flyberius 3 months ago
Stupid kids making COD jokes, retards..
xunit94 3 months ago
Greatest waste of greatest potential of mankind. So many wonderful places to drop one. Mekka, Jerusalem, Vatican, Teheran, Pyongyang, Havana, Bogota, Kabul, Damascus, list goes on. Nukes really could help making our world a better place.
soberek 4 months ago
@soberek ok
paddyroche2 4 months ago
@soberek ok
paddyroche2 4 months ago
@soberek That one was ment for washington
ThatSovietRussia 4 months ago
@ThatSovietRussia Naaaaaah. Definitely New York. Washington is just too small for this puppy.
soberek 4 months ago
Sorry I had beans...
piemonz1111 4 months ago
fucking boosters......
1234mezZO 4 months ago
The rock turned to ash? It would be better if it turned to glass. :(
Optimusprimemc1 5 months ago
Russia just wants to make bigger bombs, America doesn't play games they just aim prescision!
LegoMovieMan44 6 months ago
i got a nerd boner when he mentioned fallout
lukethegreat101 6 months ago
bitchin.........
Keeeeeeeeth 6 months ago
is that tiff from 5th gear?
d1ez3 6 months ago
Crap
alexvideo9 7 months ago
SAD SAD DAYS AHEAD FOLKS.......AND NUKES ARE STONE AGE W.M.Ds......Just think og all the trillions and trillions of dollars spent on weapons programs.....you got teslas scaler weapons.....what else have these sick bastards concocted to use for there planned destruction of the old world order....most of our world leaders have the same enemy.....free humanity and nationalism....look what the d.o.j just did to texas for tsa molestation
azascan 8 months ago
THIS IS A HYDROGEN BOMB, NOT A NUCLEAR BOMB!!!!!!!!!!!!
Busserson 8 months ago
@Busserson hydrogen bomb is a bomb that starts a nuclear blast inside hydrogen. this energy makes hydrogen start nuclear decomposition in its turn. its not burning there, it blasts with a nuclear blast.
DmitryDaren 6 months ago
Mythbusters needs to test this on Buster.
Droogie128 8 months ago
i thought it wasn't a nuke.... I heard it was 57000 tons of TNT
heavenmonkey1 9 months ago
@heavenmonkey1 more like 57000000 tons of TNT. but that was only what it was equivalent to, it was a bomb only 8m long and 2m in diameter.
nothorwitzer 9 months ago
@nothorwitzer holy shit dude :O
heavenmonkey1 8 months ago
One of the things i never understood is that at the moment of a nuclear detonation there is a EMP pulse. Why didn't it destroy the electronics in the bomber?
kellystone84 9 months ago
Let us imagine just for a moment that there are "INTELLIGENT BEINGS" in the UNIVERSE monitoring "OUR SPECIES" "MENTAL EVOLUTION PROGRESS". Is there a possibly that the ONLY thing that could be said about OUR SPECIES is that WE have become MASTERS of OUR OWN ANNIHILATION! Right NOW while I'm posting this comment MORE EFFECTIVE ways are being DEVELOPED to SPEED UP that PROCESS!!!!
ShadowG215 9 months ago
@ShadowG215 i know..
k5lta 9 months ago
Man I love nuclear weapons. Awesome fury
idi0televisi0n 9 months ago
Good News and Bad News people America and Russia have signed a new deal which means they are only allowed to have 3000 nukes. Bad news is thats still enough to destroy the world severeal times over so smile!!!! :-)
SuperMilo15 10 months ago
its always the russians who have to have the biggest isnt it?!?!?!?... besides the biggest badass and thats chuck norris!!! HAHAHA! SUCK ON THAT U RUSSIANS!!!!!
TUT808TUT 10 months ago
@TUT808TUT I bet you anything The USA has probably aready detonated something three times as big as that,
ianoparty22 2 months ago
quotes from albert einstein "i dont know about world war 3but iknow we will fight ww4 with sticks nd stones" meaning nucclear will wipe out the world cause so powerful
TheMonet9 11 months ago
the bad thing about the destructive power of these types of bombs is that if the total destructive power of the blast does not kill you the vacuum type affect will and if none of those kills you then the heat will but only if you can get past wind speeds of 200 or more mph and try not to break anything while your being thrown through the air
TheDaftpunk02 11 months ago
@TheDaftpunk02 and if THAT doesnt kill you the fallout radiation will
a2pa 11 months ago
Damn, I went to bed watching this..... Worst nightmare I've ever had, I hope we don't have WWIII, I'd literally start crying if I saw that shit explode and I knew I was gonna die...., if it was that big, imagine if they didn't scale it down
DEATHPONYDEATH666 11 months ago
Life on earth,,, walking down the green-mile... dead man walking!
Dametta13beararms 11 months ago
why something so large? that's what she said
ShadowGKCP 11 months ago
id like to see them make a bomb even bigger than this 100 maybe even 200 mg
and send it to the moon and tell people to watch on a certan date and time and see if you can see it lol.
i guess you would have to make 2 though so the people on the other side of the earth can see if they can see it to lol
MrBoneStripper98 11 months ago
@MrBoneStripper98 A 200 milligram bomb... a micro-firecracker, LOL
Daemonique 11 months ago
@Daemonique
mg was ment to stand for Mega Ton it just came out mg supposed to be mgt.
but lol i do agree that is funny.
MrBoneStripper98 11 months ago
their ready for ww3!or just new vidio games.9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 WTF! arghhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh
ILIKEXBOX1000 1 year ago
Soviet Union was respectable and badass,Russia today is a third world garbage.
WarmongerWW3 1 year ago
@1MeXiCaNGuY8 Fuck your 25-killstreaks! The Russians just scored an OVAR 9000 killstreak!
thatsprettybadass 1 year ago 3
We should drop another one of these so we can get it in HD...
becerrilfilmltd 1 year ago 2
Why do these things exist! The original Atom Bomb wiped out cities. Why on Earth were they so unhappy with the power of it they had to go producing even more powerful Nukes. Sick!
Tube2097 1 year ago
@SkyyCaptainn That's just envy talking.
Mniilla 1 year ago
i imagine that explosion if were recorded on today 's hi fi sound... boom!!! ha ha ha
tank200q 1 year ago
LOL. That's typical Russian solution. Can't make it accurate enough, no problem, let's make it so big that accuracy don't matter.
SkyyCaptainn 1 year ago 19
This has been flagged as spam show
When a branch falls from a tree and no one is around to hear it...
Would there be any sound?
One could question the thought.
...
... If a Tsar Bomb - 57,000,000 Tonnes of TNT exploded ...
And no one was around to hear it...
Would there be sound? ...
...
HELL FUCKING YEAH THERE'S SOUND! NO FUCKING DOUBT ABOUT IT!
creaturebotman 1 year ago
@creaturebotman *sigh*... If you're serious, than I'm laughing. If you're joking, than I'm laughing for a different reason.
RicStudios 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@RicStudios ...
.
of course I'm joking.
:-)
creaturebotman 7 months ago
Yep we're all dead
oddiemonsta 1 year ago 2
someone got a 25 killstreak.. haha
1MeXiCaNGuY8 1 year ago 64
@1MeXiCaNGuY8 no.
CoNa1PiCkLeS 1 year ago
@1MeXiCaNGuY8 he got it by camping... :P
thebeliva17 10 months ago
@1MeXiCaNGuY8 this would freeze the game because it will just keep constantly even when you respawn lol
k5lta 9 months ago
@1MeXiCaNGuY8 DAMN DURRKAS ALLWAYS GETTING THEM 25 KILLSTREAKS!
greendayfanman01 8 months ago
@1MeXiCaNGuY8 No, someone got 20000000000000000000 Kills.
LegoMovieMan44 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@1MeXiCaNGuY8 you have been flagged
ThePandemic101 4 months ago
57,000,000 megatons of Shit your Pants
TheR0flman 1 year ago
"Why something so large?" because explosions are cool
leon6777 1 year ago 40
@leon6777 i bet you thats 100% the reason why they detonated it
Austinq1998 11 months ago
"why something so large" the soviets always had to flex muscle to america. They were not comfortable with there pecker. They said this could never be used as a weapon....it was detonated just before a negotiation with the united states. They always did somthing like this before talking with the usa. Kruschev was just a big kid. I have learned that the soviets were NEVER EVER close to the usa in terms of military or economics. They always bluffed at all times
meronmotors 10 months ago
@leon6777
because chuck norris said during the last nuke: i'm not impressed, get me something better.. and the tsar bomba was created
KoMDraegast 8 months ago
@leon6777 They are cool, until they use it to kill actual people
chicomibaby 6 months ago
@leon6777 THATS WHAT SHE SAID! Boom
TTGabriel 5 months ago
@leon6777 wish they did a 100 megaton and did a detonation on mars for a celebration of human advances of bombs *cough* chuck norris *cough*
h8monkey1 3 months ago
Some of this video is the RDS-37 test, not the Tsar Bomba.
aardvark9100 1 year ago
thanks for the dutch subtitles
prinsofsnow 1 year ago
This thing was designed to combat the Death Star
AzyrenIshida 1 year ago
@AzyrenIshida lol star wars nerd.
Allen7111 1 year ago
WHAT THE FUCK??!! WE COULD HAVE DIES IF THE USSR MASS PRODUCED ONE OF THESE!! If we had pissed them off if they mass produced these we would have FUCKED!!!!!
Killerof2010 1 year ago
@Killerof2010 not really, they had to transport that on a plane and we could shoot that, at the same time we would have nukes in the atmosphere headed for russia
will0ughby 1 year ago
Holy fucking shit! All this world wants is to blow each other to hell.
cooldude4399 1 year ago
i didnt want 2 be there @ such a moment
Arielelda 1 year ago
If they test that means they want to C the effectivness of this detonation
to the blast destruction...... WHY?? Why "THE TEST" Someone is going down....
and it's not going to B no pleasentvill...
AirbrushTec 1 year ago
Tsar Bomba was not the largest thermonuclear device in the world, it is only the largest to have ever been detonated. It was designed to be 100 mega tons, but they chopped it in half to avoid the large amount of fallout that would follow. Today, I'm sure there are much larger "nukes" in both American and Russian stockpiles. Respect, however, goes to the Soviets for having the balls to test it out.
FalloutRadius 1 year ago
@FalloutRadius
I believe they rethought the process of making increasingly larger bombs and deemed it to be impractical, to dirty, and easier to knock out of the sky and even less effective in terms of damage. So now they have icbm's with multiple smaller warheads on board, to carpet bomb an area, multiple smaller yields ammount to greater damage than one big one equall to the sum.
StrangeDeimos 1 year ago
@StrangeDeimos Very true. I'm glad someone else thinks like I do! I did mean "larger 'nukes'" as in larger damage via nuclear device. ICBMs are, without a doubt, very effective, but lets hope we never have to use them. The United States OR Russia.
FalloutRadius 1 year ago
@FalloutRadius Yeah something this size would be impractical. Its more a show piece than an effective weapon. They have nothing near this size. The russians used to have the SS-18 "Satan", a 25 megaton ICBM! But those are gone too.
sexyitalian891 1 year ago
@sexyitalian891 Well, perhaps if a nuke of that size were to be detonated in the air instead of on impact it would cause greater damage...
Jesus H Christ, I know about that thing! Carried 10 warheads, right?
FalloutRadius 1 year ago
@FalloutRadius Yeah it could carry that one huge warhead or smaller ones. Generally tho like the other guy said if you carpet an area with smaller ones you will have more damage.
sexyitalian891 1 year ago
@FalloutRadius No, you're thinking of MIRVs....for Multiple Independent Re-entry Vehicles. MIRVs could carry ten or twelve independently targetable warheads but by treaty they limited them to three warheads....which is what ours carry today and have for the last 30 years or so.
JetMechMA 1 year ago
@JetMechMA Of course, but they're part of ICBMs, so I just say that to shorten my statement. =]
FalloutRadius 1 year ago
@FalloutRadius I see what you're saying.
JetMechMA 1 year ago
no a ussr test
nateiow 1 year ago
Was this a us test or a soviet test?
mike520012 1 year ago
@mike520012 soviet
protocolthirteen 1 year ago
@thapeople: Here's a bomb.. good luck with it..
LilFillip 1 year ago
ze konden ogen tege
alexwood1000 1 year ago
The tsar was dropped on the Novaya Zemlya island; the ground zero point was somewhere near the pond at 73.544444,54.705833 (copy the coordinates from here, open google maps and drop them into the search bar). It was an air burst at 2.5 miles altitude; the fire ball (1.5mi radius) didn't touch the ground, though the blast effects certainly did.
One comparison I found was that the Tsar released about 1/4 the energy that the Krakatoa eruption in 1870 did.
puncheex 1 year ago
isnt there a bomb that could blow up the world with one detination? i can't find any results
ww2production 1 year ago
@ww2production No.
omcorc 1 year ago
@ww2production: Consider: Tsar was ~50 MT; the Chixchulub meteor was about 50 TT, or 1,000,000 times that in energy release, and it did not broach the crust into the mantle below it; it dug about 6 km into the 20 km crust.
The planet is a tough old bird; even breaching the mantle would not have destroyed it. That did happen during the moon-creation event called the Big Splash, but even that didn't destroy the Earth, just melted it through. You might destroy all life, but not the planet.
puncheex 1 year ago
@puncheex well when i asked that i meant all life..
ww2production 1 year ago
@ww2production: Oh. You did. Wow, I'm glad to know, because there is a difference, as I hope you understand.
However, the answer is still no. To kill all life on the planet would take an energy release in excess of the Chixchulub meteor that killed all the dinosaurs. Since it was on the rough order of a million times larger than Tsar Bomba, I don't think that is yet within our grasp.
puncheex 1 year ago
@ww2production It would take multiple bombs and all that would do is kill all life but it would take a lot unless we learn how to control a asteroid in to the earth lol
hellsrage619 1 year ago
still small i want to se much bigger ^O^
echokaminari777 1 year ago
@echokaminari777 Thats what she said.
YumYums26 1 year ago
@YumYums26 lol good one ;D
riceicles123 1 year ago
make a 1000 mega tons strong nuke and it only destroy a ant^^
28bliss 1 year ago
soviet union GOING DOWN WITH THIS THING BOMB US WE BLOW THE FUCK OUT OF YEA WITH JUST ONE NUKE
pluskendall98 1 year ago
badass fucking 2012 ladies
tHeWasTeDYouTh 1 year ago
Depends what you call 'damage'. First strike nuclear attacks would likely be detonated in the sky due to the devastating effects of an EMP burst. Taking out the enemies communications would be a major priority. Detonating a nuclear device at ground level would create massive radioactive fallout. So while the effects of both would obviously be instant and devastating, each has it's 'advantages', depending what effect you desire. Military attack = sky, population = ground imo.
w3bb0 1 year ago
@w3bb0 Either way we all f*cking die right?
Stmdog14 1 year ago
@Stmdog14 most likely, depending on your distance from detonation, how the wind carried the radioactive fallout etc. The sheer size of todays weapons and the potential devastion that would ensue is far, far worse compared to Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
w3bb0 1 year ago
@w3bb0 In other words the old duck and cover would not help in this situtation.
Stmdog14 1 year ago
@Stmdog14: Nothing will help if you are too close to the center. Most of the loss of life in Japan happened from falling structures from 1 to 10 km away from the center, where getting under a solid table may possibly have saved one.
puncheex 1 year ago
do nuclear bombs cause more damage when detonated above or on the surface?
jm338 1 year ago
@jm338 What I have read was disturbing. If attacked, a nuclear device would be detonated in the atmosphere first. This would disable ALL electronic and communication devices. Ground nukes would follow. A nuke detonated on the ground would spread radiation permanently through soil and water. In the atmosphere it disperses much faster.
wannabehendrix 1 year ago
@wannabehendrix The radioactive fallout from the bomb would not be permanent. Different forms of radiation have different half lives, but none is infinite.
omcorc 1 year ago
@omcorc thanks. But would "not permanent" be several years?
wannabehendrix 1 year ago
@jm338 Above surface. If it is detonated on the surface a lot of energy is lost hitting the ground, something like that. Detonating it above the ground creates a bigger blast/damage zone. They use this strategy with conventional bombs too. A quick google search would provide a detailed explanation, and the physics behind i, if your interested. I don't know that stuff, just the result.
SuperleggeraVW 1 year ago
@SuperleggeraVW while the blast zone would be bigger the real reason the blow it up above ground is that if they were to use chemicals/nuclear bombs it would spread the radiation/chemicals over a much larger area.
hellsrage619 1 year ago
@jm338: Depends. The greatest blast and heat effects occur with a shallow air blast; say a few thousands of feet above the surface.If you're trying to dig a n ICBM out of a hardened silo, though a surface blast would probably be best.
puncheex 1 year ago
180KM?!?!?! SERIOUSLY??
TheHippyhopp 1 year ago
noooo!! there was a basket of kittens right beneath the epicenter!!
Kurtplox 1 year ago
All I can say is Damn!
mangus454 1 year ago
what's the name of this documentary?
SheoMakEr 1 year ago
and as you can see. nothing was learnt from the cold war
fartrage 1 year ago
@fartrage: Crap. If you think world powers should have learned to lie down with the lambs, you are highly mistaken. This was the first time ever that man has built weapons which could wipe life from an area completely; they first treated them like WWII style bombs, but learned quickly that they were strategic, not tactical weapons. Learning is still on-going. Be grateful.
puncheex 1 year ago
they did make the 100 mega ton nuke, thats what a Tsar bomb is, they just didn't want to drop that much tonnage in a test, and so they dropped the toned down version. At least that's what they say, who knows the truth? The USSR said a lot, and some at least we know was false.
hunterg24 1 year ago
@hunterg24: The reasons that they did do so are rather limited: danger of massive fallout; fear of massively bad PR (the hierarchy in the USSR weren't as immune to that as many thought), a desire to get the crew of the bomber back again. What other black, evil reasons could there be?
puncheex 1 year ago
bad skin burn upto 60 miles away no way is the fireball 100 miles wide. Its a 57MT bomb that was really 100 MT design but some of the uranium was replaced with lead so it would not pollute as much.
NielsShoe 1 year ago
@NielsShoe 3rd degree burns up to 60 miles away from blast. thats a 60 mile radius of Horrible burn, which will kill if not treated. the Fireball does extend at a Diameter of 100 miles, not radius, Diameter. And the shockwave of the Tsar knocked peoples windows as far as Sweden, which is 600 miles away from ground zero.
rothril 1 year ago
@rothril: No, 3 miles radius, 1.5 miles diameter. The burns 60 miles away would indeed have been horrible if the fireball had reached 50 miles.
Let's get over this "horrible burns" buggaboo, shall we? First, at 60 miles away they would be comparatively mild burns. Second, radiation burns are not different from fire burns except that rad can destroy deeper tissues (like microwaves can), or if the radiation was bad enough to inhibit the immune system. Other then that burns are burns.
puncheex 1 year ago
@NielsShoe: See the wiki article. The fireball was 2.3 km (about 1.5 miles) in diameter. It didn't reach the ground, as the blast happened at 2.5 miles altitude.
puncheex 1 year ago
Comment removed
StephenThePyro 3 months ago
thats one hell of a bomb
FireFlamesrocks 1 year ago
Wow...I was in the United States Air Force back in the mid 80's...a 30mile wide crater and a 110 mile radius fire ball? For petes sake, what did they think they were doing? Yeah, we have numbers, but so do they....and to think we came close to this back in 88 and again a few times in the 90's. Didn't know? Believe me, you don't want to know...you'll sleep better that way. What could you do about it anyway? Hide under the desks like those 50's Civil Defense films?
joelt6502 1 year ago
@joelt6502: It's apparent that you didn't learn much there. There was no crater; the fireball didn't reach the ground. The fireball radius was 2.3 km.
As I pointed out above, the majority of casualties in H&N happened from collapsing structures (tiled roofs and corner pole supports), and crawling under a sturdy table is by far the best advice. Within a few km of ground zero, nothing is going to save you but pure luck. Outside that, duck and cover is good advice in any disaster.
puncheex 1 year ago
Haha the subtitles are in flemmish :P
(Flemmish is a "dutch" dialect spoken in belgium BTW)
dudefrombelgium 1 year ago
IDIOTS
angel4boop 1 year ago
It's 57 megatons...
Jarvile 1 year ago
@Jarvile The Russians said it was 50 megatons, the united states said 50 megatons, either one is accepted. doesn't make much of a difference.
rothril 1 year ago
The 'fireball' is always smaller then the blast radius. They say it's the other way around in this video. Really, discovery channel... :roll eyes:
The explanation on why they build this is just some ridiculous propaganda BS. They only build one of these bombs for experimental purposes (and to make the world shit their pants maybe), not to actually use it as a weapon.
noxure 1 year ago
@noxure where did they test this? i know in russia but they are already retarted and fucked up mentally and physicly from radioactivity but idc they are just cocky ppl
101XxCoLexX101 1 year ago
@noxure They did not mean the nukes Total destruction Fireball. the one with all the gamma rays, x rays and what not. they meant the fireball as in heat blast from the nuke. which is what gave people 3rd degree burns 60 miles away.
rothril 1 year ago
tsar is 50 mega tons strong nuke
the ussr wanted to make a 100 mega ton nuke but were afraid of puting our planet out of orbit..
mezaciems 1 year ago 23
This has been flagged as spam show
For a great documentary on a depiction of the Hiroshima Bomb
look for Tableau No.2: 8.15AM.MON.6AUG.1945 in My Videos Section. Directed by multi award winner, Ike Ong DGGB.
zainazrai 1 year ago
@mezaciems That is so incorrect... how would we put our planet out of orbit? really? the Meteor that hit killed the dinosaurs was 2.5 Teratons. a teraton is 1000 gigatons, a gigaton is 1000 megatons. just to give you a idea of how strong it was. and earth has been hit with hundreds of meteors that strong. and didn't get knocked out of orbit. they made it 50MT cause the added lead tempering to the fusion stage. to decrease the radioactive fallout by 95%.
rothril 1 year ago
@mezaciems I thought it was cuz of nuclear fallout.
DurLock345 1 year ago
@mezaciems You serious? Is that why they scaled it down?
mrcabdriver1 1 year ago
@mezaciems
Uh no? The Ussr Tested a 150MT Air burst To put our planet out of orbit it would have to be like 2000MT
WhiteSmokes 1 year ago
@WhiteSmokes: Let's get this straight. Nothing, literally nothing we could possibly do with the technology we reach in the next 50 years will allow the planet's orbit to be disturbed by a centimeter. Breaking the planet into chunks would not change it's orbit, and we are far, far, far from being able to do that.
puncheex 1 year ago
@mezaciems: Dream on. Blame the fear of bad PR when fallout rained all over Siberia, or the loss of their bomber crew. They wanted to impress the world, not kill their own people.
Where do people get these fantasies from?
puncheex 1 year ago
@mezaciems No, it was too impractical and large to make it 100. Eventually the more megatons you add starts to not matter. The blast diameter dosen't get any larger at a certain point. Due to uraniums splitting point.
LemonadeRabbit 1 year ago
@LemonadeRabbit The main reason was the radioactivity, in fact. They wanted to keep radioactivity low (which actually worked, as stated in the video).
Kenji314159 1 year ago
@Kenji314159 Yup, that as well. Kind of surprising really that they were able to keep the radioactivity down that much.
LemonadeRabbit 1 year ago
@mezaciems
no it wont, just cant find enough space to test, to move earth, u need at least 10000 billion one, and u need to test it on moon to c if it works.
zz9394 1 year ago
@mezaciems it would take much more than 100MT with a astroid the saize that killed the dinos was mroe powerful than thousands upon thousands of nukes. and that didnt put us out of orbit, they were afraid of putting a hole in the Ozone and going to high into the atmosphere.
MrAMERICANxMUSCLE 1 year ago
@mezaciems Huh? Put the planet out of orbit? Nooo, more like didn't want to make that much fallout. Thats the reason it was scaled back to 50Mt..
ZXLNT 1 year ago
@mezaciems Holy Shit !
maddi2k9 1 year ago
a little 100 megaton bomb could not put the mighty earth out of orbit,only mother nature's huge asteriods,comets and planetesimals traveling faster than bullets and hitting with 100 Million Mega tons or more can do that lol.
k5lta 1 year ago
I hate measurements done in "Tons of TNT" i dont even know how much damage One tont of tnt does. Yet.
finalblur 1 year ago
@finalblurGoogle (and youtube) is your friend. There were three tests called Sailorhat that exploded exactly 500 tons of TNT each in optimal conditions; they're on YouTube. There is a video there "1 TON Bomb"; I don't know how accurate the title is. Lots more.
puncheex 1 year ago
what a cool bomb but not on japan.........
MrJAL117 1 year ago
The subtitels are Dutch
VuurwerkFan12 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Detonate that (TSAR) similar H-bomb at the surface of planet MARS particularly at ICE (frozen lake) or mountains of MARS to produce liquid water, and to erupt volcanoes creating carbon dioxide and water vapor Atmosphere. So that in the future new living things can survive or adapt on it; micro-organisms that consume CO2 and exhale Oxygen and releasing Nitrogen (side-product) or plants / trees that produce O2 and then human being and animals to complete the cycle (inhale O2 and exhale CO2).
MrVrsilvestrejr2008 1 year ago
What a dirty filthy discusting bomb even a quarter of a stick of TNT is very dangerous.
PavilionPlaza2009 1 year ago
only sick people create sick weapons. Do they really want the humanity to be erased from earth?
slashislashi 1 year ago
@slashislashi You are aware the Tsar Bomba was created during the arms race between the USSR and the USA. The US created weapons like this but at a lower scale. And no they just wanted America to be erased from Earth. :)
greenday4455 1 year ago
@greenday4455: Not really. They wanted their economic model to prevail; they wanted for their country, families and themselves (in reverse order) to survive, preferably with their culture and civilization intact. As did those in the west. As it happened; all were better men than many people feared; no one pushed the button. But it isn't sickness; it's ambition, fear and anger which drove them; essentially the same as all other people.
puncheex 1 year ago
@puncheex Indeed
greenday4455 1 year ago
multiple warheads ICBMs are far more efficient than making it bigger :D
machvelocy 1 year ago