aa
.
.
af
a .
~
nm
.
awe
-
~
;
@
.
-
~
vio mes yyeSee.
.
to
The feeling was expressed that Dr, Bradbury should re-write his
letter of Jahbary 18, 1954, to Gen, Fields, 4n the light of subsequent
experience,
Dr. Fisk, in particular, emphasized that the statement
“
rm,
of
regarding DOD acceptance of given BREENprob 2bi1ity should be
reviewed,
wr
It was also felt that test results should be thoroughly con-
sidered before any production steps more drastic than the program
described by Dr. ‘Pittman were undertaken,
(Appendix C, item 2)
“There was no expression of opinion that the 1A-6 program should be
"out back. The possibility that 30 megatons could be achieved with a
oem,
EREty: device employing 95% Li-6 was impressive. Dr. von
wet
ne
Neumann said that this was synonymous with the possibility of achieving
greater efficiency and reduced weight.
Puan
Los Alamos intended to develop a
snalor{EBising 95% Li-6. Dr, Rabi suggested that the Committee
"
return to“these questions at its next meeting.
Mr. Whitman reported on his visits to Oak Ridge and Savannah River.
Reactor
Matters
In general, his impression was excellent.
production changes were being ably handled.
The problems involved in the
Many of his fears on the
Homohor.ogeneous reactor project had been allayed, and he thought the corrosic
geneous
Reactor problem would be solved. It was felt at Oak Ridge that the homogeneous
reactor would be the answer to any need for large amounts of low n/g-se2
plutonium,
DCE ARCHIVES
The reactors at Savannah River looked good, although two problems
Savannah were bothersome at the moment:
River
Reac-
“yp eaten
tors
(1) The reactors were "nervous", experisn
ing frequent shut-downs due to the abundant and active safety controls.
.
+.
(2) There were worries about the safety aspects of enriched loadings. -
146