Talk:Salted bomb

I removed the redirect on this page that lead to Cobalt bomb, but that page contained no information on what was specifically a salted bomb in reference of nuclear weapons. Also since Cobalt bombs are not the only type of salted bomb, it can't the only place where readers are directed to.--Crab182 (talk) 20:39, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

There is a weasel-word tag on the bit about "It has been suggested that the use of salted nuclear weapons could end all life on Earth" - well, the Cobalt Bomb article attributes this multiple times to Leó Szilárd (who proposed the idea of the Cobalt Bomb apparently). I don't know how this can be appropriately attributed though, but the little "by whom?" link looks silly in this light. draeath (talk) 20:43, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

Two different concepts here
"Salting" a bomb with gold or sodium is conceptually very different to using cobalt. The isotope produced by neutron activation of gold has a half life of only a couple of days, while for sodium it is only 14 hours. They will produce extremely intense radiation (particularly gammas), but the radiation will decay to safe levels quickly enough that people could survive by remaining in buried shelters. Furthermore the half-life is too short for global dispersion by stratospheric winds; the material will have decayed before it lands. I have heard this concept referred to as a "gamma fence": a temporary nuclear barrier that is impassable to an armoured assault, but is not intended to exterminate a population.

In contrast, a key point with a cobalt salted bomb is that the half-life is short enough for the radiation to be very intense, yet long enough that food reserves in a shelter could not possibly last long enough. -- 202.63.39.58 (talk) 16:38, 17 July 2011 (UTC)

Article should be reported as science fiction.
1. Unmoderated bomb neutrons above 1 MeV (avg fission neutron is 14 MeV) are less likely to create the posited isotopes but rather side reactions. Thorium-232 fissions with >500KeV neutrons; and undergoes (n,2n) reaction (to Th-231); other examples of (n,2n) reactions are Lithium-7, Beryllium-9, Uranium-238. Carbon-14 is created from (n,p) reaction. Note that neutron absorption cross-sections of different isotopes gets smaller as neutron energy increases (high energy neutrons travel further thru shielding because they react less). 2. Doing forensic neutron activation analysis, we used thermal neutron reactor source to activate samples. Cobalt-59 absorbs thermal neutrons (0.1 MeV) to form Cobalt-60. 3. Cobalt-60 became known to US Government scientists as Cobalt is a contaminant in Nickel of Stainless Steel used in Submarine construction. Most thermal neutrons generated by submarine nuclear reactors are harmlessly absorbed by even Z metals Iron, Nickel, Chromium. Cobalt posed a disposal hazard. Like other radioactive materials sold by the NRC to industry, its appealing half life and gamma/x-ray emission made it popular and useful. 4. Liquid Sodium-Potassium alloy is used as coolant in some reactors. Sodium-24 is not a problem. High neutron flux turns Zinc-64 into Zinc-65; same high neutron flux turns Zinc-65 into stable Zinc-66,67,or 68. How about "the most toxic substance known to man" Polonium-210? Made from Bismuth-209 neutron absorption. Hmmm, the Russians used liquid Bismuth as reactor coolant in their submarines. 5. Strontium-90 and Cesium-137 have 30 year half lives and are 5% and 6% of the total bomb fallout, much more so than any piggybacked "salt" could generate based on neutron yield. And together with Iodine-129 (nillion year half life) they kill from within as well as external radiation. 2601:601:4300:1BE3:56:37F6:8FDC:824B (talk) 10:31, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

Confusing statement
The first sentence states "not to be confused with a dirty bomb" - this is highly misleading because a salted nuclear bomb is, by definition a bomb with characteristics of both a non salted nuclear weapon and a dirty bomb, thus it could be seen as being a form of dirty bomb. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.93.146.3 (talk) 08:26, 2 November 2022 (UTC)

Internal and external contradiction within Wikipedia
This article states that "No intentionally salted bomb has ever been atmospherically tested, and as far as is publicly known, none has ever been built". Not only does the following statement contrtadict this, but on the separate Wikipedia page for Operation Redwing, it is clearly stated that the Flathead shot is "TX-28S (for "salted") test, intentionally dirty high fallout". Clearly either this page or the Redwing article are in error. Both cannot be correct. Either this page should be corrected or the Redwing page should be. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.93.146.3 (talk) 08:36, 2 November 2022 (UTC)