Dick is trying to psychologically profile me! how weird, why not just present the facts as he sees them? who knows what motivates these bluff merchants! He ain't very good because my age is under my name! Me a student eh Dick? mature student then?
Anyway just to waste more of ones valuable time Dick comes up with a series of demonstrable bluffs and here they are.
Dick
Go back to RIH’s first post. This is a statement of unsupported allegations,
Dick that's an unsupported allegation!
Hoist with your own petard
Well lets re-examine those alleged allegations shall we?
RIH
The first production run at Winscale lasted 35 days and produced 135 grams of fissile material
Actually it was 132 grams oops 3 grams out. Memory's obviously going!
See The BBC documentary "Winscale, Britain's Biggest Nuclear Disaster" 2007
The description is given by Tom Tuohy the Deputy General Manager of Winscale.
Thomas Tuohy: Windscale manager who doused the flames of the 1957 fire - Obituaries, News - The Independent
A Bloody Hero!
@ 28' 54'' into the film
Narrator ...
and in August 1952 the first Plutonium left Winscale to become part of Britains Atom Bomb
Tom Tuohy
"I broke down the reaction vessel myself, personally opened it up, scrambled around amongst the Calcium Fluorides to see if I could find anything, and there I found a piece of Plutonium ... about the size of a 50 pence piece, 132 grams and that was our first piece. So all this vast industrial complex and 6 years of activity came down to 132 grams of Plutonium"
The 35 days comes from here
Britain's Nuclear Weapons - From MAUD to Hurricane
They had enough for the first Hurricane Test by 15th of September, as a previous poster pointed out it used some material from Canadian reactors. Any one know anything about these Canadian reactors?
The point here is that it's not a straight forward thing producing any of these materials it takes time and a lot of energy. Los Alamos used more energy than the 5 biggest US corporations combined.
For the other alleged unsupported allegations in Post 1
http://www.pprune.org/5875430-post1.html
See
http://www.pprune.org/5875430-post12.html
http://www.pprune.org/5875430-post40.html
http://www.pprune.org/5875430-post52.html
See below for the Orange Herald 'allegation'
Dick
not only the general statements that “the RAF had no nukes until the early 1960s”
I've now changed the title of the thread to
New Title
"The RAF had no nukes until the Early '60s ?"
As this is a "rumour network" I thought I'd start the thread off as a 'rumour' sorry, if that upsets you so much, anyway I've changed it so now it's a query any objections?
Dick
and “The UK's cold war effort was purely propaganda”
Well it was largely a propaganda effort like some crusty old war horse demanding attention from the world by just making some loud bangs, and the spin machine does the rest.
See the Gavin Lyle Sunday Graphic Article, it's typical.
http://www.pprune.org/5875430-post67.html
Dick
but some details about the production of fissile material.
You mean this?
RIH
Given that the UK's fake 'H Bomb', 'Orange Herald' used virtually all the available fissile material in it's manufacture,
This comes from the same BBC Winscale documentary
@ 49' 00''
Narrator ...
but Penny had a back up plan, another bomb, it was called 'Orange Herald'
Dr Bryan Taylor,
Theoretical Physicist, Aldermaston 1955-62
"I thought Orange Herald was a stupid device, it wasn't elegant, it couldn't be developed any further, a dead end design and it consumed an enormous amount of very expensive fissile material, It's not what I would have recommended, but I wasn't in charge".
Narrator
It wasn't an H-Bomb at all, just a massive atom bomb they were convinced would produce a megaton, it needed huge quantities of Plutonium and the magic ingredient, Tritium.
Dick
Now the statement about “nukes” imprecise though it is, has been comprehensively trashed on this forum.
Has it? I think your bluffing flat foot! though of course you are entitled to your opinion!
Let's see ...
20 Obsolecent Fat Boy style weapons? Sir Norman Brook's, (Cabinet Secretary and chair of the Home Defence Committee) assessment not mine.
and some dangerous (to the RAF I mean) Yellow Sun Mk 1's
Dick
The statement about “propaganda” is so inclusive that it has to be untrue.
So if some thing is 'so inclusive' it can't be true? Is that logic? Dick?
Refer to the Gavin Lyle article above, PURE PROPAGANDA and deliberate lies! And obviously Lyle's article isn't unique.
http://www.pprune.org/5875430-post67.html
See also Chapman Pincher's "Inside Story"
Dick
Refer to Prof Carl Popper, “Der Logik der Forschung”. (Did you like that – it is one of RIH’s favourite gambits, to throw in an impressive reference that may or may not be true
Gambits? what's this a game of chess? WTF?
Dick
So why did RIH start the thread in the first place?
Rather than let Dick answer his own question, I'll answer it for him
I'm interested in widening my understanding and gaining knowledge.
Dick
Clearly he is no universal expert.
Who is Dick?
Dick
He thought the Thor was a defensive missile,
We all make mistakes.
Dick
and his statement that you had to have supercomputing power to develop swept wings
This is a misrepresentation of what I actually said, I just said digital computers you know a von Neumann machine, the need for these came from the West's need to crunch more numbers than the Soviets.
Dick
was politely dismissed by John Farley (and RIH’s retreat into Finite Element Analysis and FEM software simply shows he was wrong in the first place)
Again a misrepresentation of the facts
Here the facts of the matter
http://www.pprune.org/5875295-post65.html
and
http://www.pprune.org/5875300-post66.html
Here's what Albert Kitchenside said about the use of computers in an e-mail exchange
In the early 50s papers were published on 'energy methods' of structural analysis, in this country it was largely the works of Argyris, who was Professor of Aircraft Structures at Imperial College when I graduated in 1951. These together with improved calculators, matrix algebra and eventually digital computers enabled the more complex 'redundant' structures required for the design of efficient fail safe designs to be analysed. Albert Kitchenside
Dick
And didn’t you like the way he tried to put down JF with “On the Application of Oblique Co-Ordinates to Problems of Plane Elasticity and Swept-back Wing Structures" (ARC R&M 2745) - Hemp (1950)” He got the title straight from the net.
I downloaded and read the paper from the very useful on-line Aerade Archive at Cranfield University
AERADE
The paper is here (there's a typo in the original post [which is now fixed] and in the quote above I have slight dyslexia hte documnet refeernce is 2754 not 2745, to err is Human!)
AERADE
I was discussing with Albert Kitchenside, the transfer of fatigue data from a Vickers design with 'straight wings' to the Valiant with lets say, more swept wings.
DickWell some one has to do it! Why the stress this was going on 50-60 years ago. Its History!
Dick
The tone of RIH’s posts is sort of vaguely student left wing, anti-capitalist, anti the “military/industrial complex.
Oh Dick that's just soooo cold war! Hmmn start with Human Being, the rest is trivial IMO.
Dick
I think, and as RIH has said, I am entitled to my opinion,
Indeed you are!
Dick
that he is a student wind-up merchant with a 21inch screen using the internet to show he knows all that we plebs don’t know.
Basically you're wrong Dick please don't have another stab at it it's trivial and life is too short after all!